Parent and peer attachment relationships and time perspective in adolescence: Are they related to satisfaction with life?

Abstract

The primary aim of this research was to provide evidence about how adolescents’ self-reported parent/peer attachment and time perspective relate to their satisfaction with life. A sample of 1211 adolescents completed self-report measures assessing life satisfaction, time perspective, and the perceived quality of parent and peer attachment. Results showed statistically significant relationships among these variables. Boys resulted higher scored than girls in parent trust and satisfaction with life. Girls resulted higher scored than boys in parent alienation, peer communication, and negative past. Parent and peer attachment predicted satisfaction with life, although the variance explained by peer attachment was low. Negative Past, Hedonistic Present, and Future were signiﬁcantly associated with satisfaction with life in the expected directions. The present study has important implications for future empirical investigation and for clinical intervention.

Keywords

Satisfaction with life time perspective parent attachment peer attachment adolescence

Life satisfaction (LS) is an important construct in the field of positive psychology. According to Diener and Diener (1995), global LS reflects a cognitive judgment of one’s satisfaction with his or her life as a whole. In this study we intend to investigate the link among attachment representations, time perspective (TP), and satisfaction with life in adolescence.

As regards empirical evidences, first, research has found a link in adolescence between LS and attachment representations. Early adolescents report greater LS when they perceive high levels of maternal affection and low levels of parental criticism (Bendayan et al., 2013). Significant relationships between parental attachment and LS have been found (Jiang et al., 2013). Both parental and peer attachment were positively related to LS, but parental attachment was the stronger unique predictor (Ma and Huebner, 2008). According to the latter authors peer attachment constitutes a mediator between parent attachment and satisfaction with life in adolescence. Parent attachment is interiorized in the internal working models of attachment relationships and influences the expectations about other interpersonal relationship (internal working models (IWM), Bowlby, 1980, 1982; Pace, 2014; Pace et al., 2012; Tambelli et al., 2012; Thompson, 2008).

Second, research has evidenced a relationship between satisfaction with life and TP (see Zhang et al., 2013 for a review). In adolescence, well-being is particularly related to past and future TP, because adolescents confront themselves with the accomplishment of several challenges (Carelli et al., 2011; Worrell and Mello, 2007). These include the process of awareness and acceptance of past memories involving parents (Havighurst, 1952; Steca et al., 2009), and the first choices about their future life, in such a way that the future becomes the dimension where they place the fulfillment of aspirations and projects (Boyd and Zimbardo, 2005; Laghi et al., 2008, 2011, 2012).

TP seems to be the most significant predictor of LS (Zhang and Howell, 2011): Research has evidenced that a past positive TP was related to LS (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999), while a past negative TP was related to lower LS (Boniwell et al., 2010; Drake et al., 2008). Also, future TP was positively related to LS (Lessing, 1972). Lastly, according to Zhang et al. (2013) a balanced TP was related to increased satisfaction with life.

Third, empirical evidence about gender differences is not consistent. They differ depending on the specifications or samples considered. Regarding LS in U.S.A., in early adolescence and adolescence, different authors (Jiang et al., 2013; Ma and Huebner, 1998; Nickerson and Nagle, 2004) found that girls scored higher than boys; otherwise, in Spain, Bendayan et al. (2013) found no gender differences in LS. In Italian context, Caprara and Steca (2005) found that young adults males scores higher positive thinking than female, while Caprara and Steca (2006) found that adults males scored significantly higher than women in satisfaction with life.

Several researches have enhanced the relations between satisfaction and adolescent adjustment (Caprara and Steca, 2005, 2006; Diener and Diener, 1995), or between satisfaction and psychopathological disease (Lewinsohn et al., 2003), although the role of both time perceptive and attachment relationships has received less attention.

TP and attachment representations

According to Boyd and Zimbardo (2005) and Laghi et al. (2008), TP is the individual’s relation with time, a subjective process whereby individuals parcel their personal and social experiences into temporal categories. Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) found that girls score higher in Positive Past and Future than males, while Usunier and Valette-Florence (2007) found that girls are more Past-Oriented than boys. Andretta et al. (2013) found that females were more represented in the Pessimists cluster when compared to males, and males were slightly over-represented in the Optimists cluster, also if these differences appear small. Greene and DeBacker (2004) found that boys are more Future-Oriented than girls, and Zimbardo et al. (1997) found that boys are more Present-Oriented than girls. Keough et al. (1999) reported significantly higher scores for females on the Future subscale and significantly higher scores for males on the Present Hedonistic subscale.

However, several studies evidenced no gender differences (Boniwell et al., 2010; Bowles, 1999; McCabe and Barnett, 2000; Mello and Worrell, 2006). TP also involves autobiographical memories about relevant interpersonal relationships (see Ely and Mercurio, 2011). If research has evidenced a strong link between TP and LS, and between parental attachment representations and LS, it is crucial to explore the relationship between TP and attachment-related representations, which in the attachment theory have been theorized through the concept of IWM. From a theoretical point of view, there is a deep relationship in the concept of TP and IWM.

On the other hand, IWM are generalized event representations that comprehend the three temporal dimensions because they imply past memories, present cognitions, and future expectations. So they summarize the three time dimensions: past, present, and future (Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991; Laghi et al., 2009).

Attachment theorists have amply stated that the process of adolescence will have a greater probability of success if there is an autonomous closeness to parents, that is, if there is an emotional and cognitive dependency within a significant relationship (Bowlby, 1969). The relational dynamic of exploration from a secure base, that in a child manifests itself through childhood exploratory behavior starting with the caregiver, throughout adolescence becomes a peculiarity of the state of the mind. They are open to relationships but also capable of thinking and choosing autonomously (Allen, 2008; Bifulco et al., 2006; Cassidy and Shaver, 1999, 2008).

Parents become “a psychological secure base’’ from which adolescents can freely explore their inner world, and as a “safe haven” to which they can go back to when they feel overwhelmed by negative memories and emotions. They represent a secure base if the offspring perceive they’re in a significant relationship with them, in which they are encouraged in their attempts to reach a cognitive and emotional autonomy (Allen, 2008; Bifulco et al., 2014; Schimmenti and Bifulco, 2013).

Regarding attachment to parents and peers, research seems almost univocally to evidence that girls score higher than boys in peers’ attachment (see the meta-analytic review of Gorrese and Ruggieri (2012)). These gender differences regard overall trust and communication (Gullone and Robinson, 2005; Nada Raja et al., 1992; Pace and Zavattini, 2011; Ruijten et al., 2011).

The present research

Adolescents’ satisfaction with life is grounded upon time dimensions and attachment representations because it implies the ways through which adolescents process affects, cognitions, and behaviors associated with past memories, present representations, and future expectations, overall with regards to attachment and affective bonds (Crowell et al., 2008; Pace et al., 2013). For this reason, it can be worthwhile to investigate the roles that both TP and attachment representations have on satisfaction with life.

The primary aim of this research was to provide first evidence about how adolescents’ self-reported parent/peer attachment and TP relate to their satisfaction with life. In this study, we hypothesized that TP and attachment representations both contribute to satisfaction with life. We used an attachment measure which captures adolescents’ perceptions of the quality of the attachment with both parents and peers, evaluating behavioral and affective/cognitive dimensions of both actual adolescents’ relationships. First, gender and age differences between parent and peer attachment, TP, and satisfaction with life were investigated. More specifically, unique relationships between parent and peer attachment, TP, and satisfaction with life were analyzed by performing regression analysis. It was expected that parent attachment would be able to explain more of the variance of satisfaction with life than peer attachment. This hypothesis is congruent with Laible et al. (2000), who have argued in favor of the hierarchical organization of attachment models, and with Tambelli et al. (2012), who found that externalizing problems were predicted only by parental attachment dimensions.

Second, the extent to which parent and peer attachment relationships are specific determinants of TP will be studied. Postulated by attachment perspective, it was hypothesized that adolescents who are higher in parent and peer attachment are more past positive-oriented and future-oriented, and less negative past-oriented. This positive attitude toward past and future perspective and toward their parents and peer representations closely predict satisfaction with life.

Method

Participants

The sample consisted of 1211 students (489 boys and 722 girls). The average age of the students was 17.31 (SD = 1.09; range 16–19). Participation was preceded by an informed-consent procedure that required active consent from both students and parents. The questionnaires were administered in the classroom during a regular class period and took approximately 30 min to complete. Instructions stated that the questionnaires were voluntary and that responses were anonymous and confidential. All students responded to the same questionnaire packet, with measures administered in counterbalanced order to each group of subjects. The study followed the norms for ethical research approved by the Italian Psychology Association.

Measures

The Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al., 1985) is composed of five items used to measure one’s global satisfaction with life. Each item is rated on a seven-point scale (1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree). The results of the five items are summed to produce an overall score (sample item, “If could live my life over, I would change almost nothing”). The SWLS reflects the cognitive components of one’s satisfaction with life and is well suited for use with different age groups. In the current study, internal reliability of SWLS was 0.89.

Attachment to parents

The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA; Armsden and Greenberg, 1987) was used to measure the quality of parent attachment in adolescence and the affective–cognitive dimension of attachment. It evaluates the security in the relationship with specific attachment figures and the adolescent’s trust in the availability and sensitivity of an attachment figure (sample item, “My parents respect my feelings”; α = .78 in the present study), the quality of communication, which promotes comfort in the relationship with an attachment figure (sample item, “When my parents knows that something is bothering me, they ask me about it”; α = .81 in the present study) and the extent of anger, alienation resulting from an unresponsive or inconsistently responsive attachment figure (sample item, “I don’t get much attention from my parents”; α = .84 in the present study). The three scales were rated on a five-point scale ranging from “completely untrue” to “completely true” and were used to measure the quality of parent attachment in adolescence.

Attachment to peer

Twenty-five item versions of the subscales trust, communication, and alienation of the IPPA (Armsden and Greenberg, 1987) were used to measure the quality of peer attachment in adolescence. The trust scale measures the extent to which an adolescent trusts peer to respect and accept his or her feelings (sample item, “My friends respect my feelings”; α = .77 in the present study). The communication scale measures the extent to which an adolescent experiences having high quality of communication with peer (sample item, “When my friends know that something is bothering me, they ask me about it”; α = .80 in the present study). The alienation scale measures the degree to which an adolescent experiences negative feelings toward peer (sample item, “I don’t get much attention from my friends”; α = .81 in the present study). Several reviews of attachment instruments have found the IPPA to be a valid and reliable measure. The Italian version of the scale has been used in a number of studies, and its reliability and validity have been shown to be satisfactory (Laghi et al., 2009; Pace et al., 2011; Tambelli et al., 2012).

TP

The TP was measured using the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI; Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999) in its Italian validated version for adolescents (Laghi et al., 2013). This instrument consists of 25-item Likert-type scale, on which each item has five possible responses (from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”). The ZTPI is a multidimensional scale which measures TP in three temporal frames: the past, present, and future, and the attitude related to each of them. It contains the following five subscales: Positive Past (sample item “Familiar childhood sights, sounds, smells often bring back a flood of wonderful memories”; α = .80 in the present study), Negative Past (sample item, “The past has too many unpleasant memories that I prefer not to think”; α = .79 in the present study), Hedonistic Present (sample item, “It’s important to put excitement in my life”; α = .70 in the present study), Fatalistic Present (sample item, “Fate determines much in my life”; α = .78 in the present study), and Future (sample item, “I’m able to resist temptations when I know that there is a work to be done”; α = .76 in the present study). The Italian short version of the scale has good psychometric properties (internal reliability of the ZTPI ranges from 0.70 to 0.80) and a convergent validity with different measures of attachment security and well-being (Laghi et al., 2013).

Results

Preliminary analyses: Gender and age differences

For comparative purposes the sample was divided into two age groups: 16–17 years (N = 700; M = 282; F = 418), 18–19 years (N = 511; M = 207; F = 304).

Analysis of variance of sex and age as between-subjects factors was conducted for the satisfaction with life scores. The ANOVA only revealed an effect for sex (F(1, 1209) = 14.07, p < .001, η ² = .01). There were neither effects of age, F(1,1209) = 1.17, p = .29, nor significant interactions between the variables, F(1, 1209) =.24, p = .61. Males obtained higher scores (M = 23.84; SD = 6.84) than females (M = 22.30; SD = 6.73).

Regarding Parent Attachment, MANOVA analysis revealed main effect only for sex, λ = .98, F(3,1.205) = 4.65, p < .001, η_p ² = .01, and not for age, λ = .99, F(3,1.205) = 4.65, p = .06. There was no effect of interaction between the variables, λ = 1, F(3,1.205)= .04, p = .99. Results from the univariate tests revealed that groups differed on the subscale of Trust, F(1,1209)=8.47, p < .001, η_p ² = .04, where males showed a higher mean score (M = 38.01; SD = 7.62) than females (M = 36.68; SD = 7.59), and Alienation, F(1,1209)=4.60, p < .001, η_p ² = .07, where females (M = 27.43; SD = 7.74) obtained higher scores than males (M = 26.46; SD = 7.44).

Regarding Peer attachment, MANOVA revealed main effect only for sex, λ = .96, F(3,1.205) = 14.13, p < .001, η_p ² = .03, and not for age, λ = 1, F(3,1.205) = .18, p = .90. There was no effect of interaction between the variables, λ = .99, F(3,1.205)= 2.01, p = .11. Results from the univariate tests revealed that groups differed on the subscale of Communication, F(1,1209)=5.77, p < .001, η_p ² = .05, where females showed a higher mean score (M = 29.60; SD = 6.28) than males (M = 28.55; SD = 6.60).

Regarding TP, MANOVA revealed main effect only for sex, λ = .98, F(5,1.203)= 2.66, p < .001, η_p ² = .02, and not for age, λ = .99, F(3,1.205)= 1.42, p = .21. There was no effect of interaction between the variables, λ =.99, F(3,1.205)= 1.07, p = .21. Results from the univariate tests revealed that groups differed on the subscale of Negative Past, F(1,1209)=4.38, p < .001, η_p ² = .03, where females showed a higher mean score (M = 13.24; SD = 4.37) than males (M = 12.68; SD = 4.24).

Zero order correlation between the attachment, TP, and satisfaction with life measures

The results of correlation analyses between TP, Parent and Peer Attachment, and Satisfaction dimensions are shown in Table 1. There were significant positive correlations between Satisfaction with Life and Parent and Peer Attachment, Positive Past, Hedonistic Present, and Future. Satisfaction with Life was negatively related to Negative Past and Fatalistic Present.

Table 1.

Zero order correlation between the attachment, time perspective, and satisfaction with life measures.

	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.
1. Sex	–
2. IPPA-Parents	.06	–
3. IPPA-Peer	−.01	.29^**	−
4. Positive Past	−.04	.33^**	.21^**	–
5. Negative Past	−.06	−.42^**	−.27^**	−.24^**	−
6. Fatalistic Present	.01	−.21^**	−.16^**	−.03	.28^**	−
7. Hedonistic Present	.01	.21^**	.21^**	.18^*	−.02	.13^**	–
8. Future	−.05	.31^**	.10^**	.29^**	−.03	−.07	.11^*	–
9. Satisfaction with Life	.11^**	.52^**	.27^**	.23^**	−.34^**	−.16^**	.21^**	.25^**	–

Note: * p < .05, ** p < .01.

Parent and peer attachment, and TP as predictors of satisfaction with life

Next, using hierarchical multiple regression, we further examined the associations between parent, peer attachment, TP, and satisfaction with life. In the regression, we entered age and gender in the ﬁrst step. Parent and Peer Attachment were entered in the second step, and TP dimensions in the third step (Table 2).

Table 2.

Hierarchical regression analyses for parent and peer attachment predicting satisfaction with life.

	B	SE B	Β	R	R²	Δ R²
Step 1				.12	.01	.01
Sex	1.20	.33	.09*
Age	.15	.12	.03
Step 2				.54	.29	.28
IPPA-Parent Attachment	.13	.01	.36*
IPPA-Peer Attachment	.04	.01	.09*
Step 3				.57	.32	.03
ZTPI-Positive Past	−.01	.04	−.01
ZTPI-Negative Past	−.23	.04	−.15*
ZTPI-Fatalistic Present	−.07	.05	−.03
ZTPI-Hedonistic Present	.20	.06	.09*
ZTPI-Future	.21	.05	.11*

Note: The tabled values for Beta reflect Bs after step 3. * p < .01.

The hierarchical multiple regression analysis showed that variables in Step 1 significantly predicted LS, R²= .01, F (2,1.208) = 8.22, p < .001, with gender emerging as a significant predictor, β = .11, p < .001. The inclusion of Parent and Peer Attachment in Step 2 was found to add to the prediction, R²= .28, F (4,1.206) = 123.54, p < .001, with both dimensions, emerging as significant positive predictors, β = .47, p < .001, and β = .13, p < .001, respectively. The inclusion of Hedonistic Present, Negative Past, and Future dimensions in the model increased the variance accounted for by 32%.

Negative Past, Hedonistic Present, and Future were signiﬁcantly associated with Satisfaction with life in the expected directions. Peer attachment dimension was related with Satisfaction although the variance explained was very low, β = .09, p < .01.

Discussion

Overall, this study first evidenced gender differences in most variables considered; second, the role played by parent and peer attachment in satisfaction with life; finally, the contribution of both TP and attachment representations to satisfaction with life.

Regarding gender differences our results showed that girls seem to have better peer communication than boys, which is in line with other studies (e.g. Gorrese and Ruggieri, 2012; Gullone and Robinson, 2005; Nada Raja et al., 1992; Ruijten et al., 2011). On the other hand, based on the data, girls appear to be more pessimistic than boys; in effect, they scored higher than boys in Negative Past and Parents’ Alienation, and scored lower than boys in Parents’ Trust and Communication, and Satisfaction with life.

Such gender differences are very peculiar and difficult to explain because of the limitations presented by convenience sampling strategy. Future research should extend the recruitment to a stratified sample (e.g. stratified Socioeconomic status (SES), provenience, and culture). In such a way, it would be possible to check if the gender differences identified are depending on the samples considered, or it is possible to extend results to the actual Italian context. However, our results are consistent with Caprara and Steca studies: Caprara and Steca (2005) found that male young adults in Italy scored higher in positive thinking than their female counterparts; additionally, Caprara and Steca (2006) found that adult men scored significantly higher than women in satisfaction with life.

A possible explanation of this phenomenon is that Italian girls would perceive parents more demanding than boys because of the several cultural requests addressed to women. In other countries, the family work conflict could be present in women and men, but in Italy it is almost exclusively a feminine problem (e.g. Marshall and Tracy, 2009).

Regarding the relationship between parent/peer attachment and satisfaction with life (LS), the results evidenced a strong relationship between parent attachment and LS, and a moderate relationship between peer attachment and LS. In adolescence, according to theoretical and empirical literature, the attachment bond with parents changes and the importance of peer relationships grows (Allen, 2008). Nevertheless, parents do not lose their importance in representing a secure base for the construction of new interpersonal bonds (Allen, 2008). Representations of parents influence the other interpersonal relationships, as well as social adjustment (Bowlby, 1980, 1982; Thompson, 2008). The results of this study are congruent with both the theoretical approach and empirical research related to attachment. For example, Ma and Huebner (2008) have demonstrated that peer attachment constitutes a mediator between parent attachment and satisfaction with life in adolescence. Tambelli et al. (2012), using IPPA, have demonstrated that parental attachment dimensions predict externalizing problems, whereas peer attachment dimensions predict only internalizing problems.

Both attachment representations and TP are based upon past memories (Bowlby, 1980, 1982; Ely and Mercurio, 2011), both include present perceptions, and both regard future expectations. Generally, TP includes past, present, and future perspective; more specifically, attachment representations are grounded on parents’ past memories of attachment, and correspond to present perceptions, which vice versa influence future expectations about interpersonal relationships. Results, showing that both Negative Past (related to autobiographical memories), Hedonistic Present and Future (related to expectations) predicted satisfaction with life, were consistent with previous research (Boniwell et al., 2010; Drake et al., 2008; Lessing, 1972).

Individuals with a secure attachment styles have processed past memories of their parents, and so they develop positive expectations about their futures. At the same time, they have positive and confident perceptions about themselves, others, and life, so they have higher chances of being satisfied with life (Berlin et al., 2008; Bowlby, 1980, 1982; Bretherton and Munholland, 2008; Thompson, 2008).

Strengths, limitations, and direction for future research

Some limitations of the study must be pointed out. First, the relation identified in the study is correlational and not causal. For this reason, this study represents only a first step in understanding the relations among parents and peer attachment, TP, and satisfaction with life in adolescent sample. Second, all data were collected using self-report questionnaires. Studies using multiple informants to assess parent and peer attachment relationships could be very useful for this topic. Finally, a longitudinal study would provide perspective and generate data on changes in satisfaction with life, TP, and attachment relationships across the years. The lack of racial diversity in this sample also limits the generalizations we can make as regards to the findings. Replication of the research on groups with different demographic characteristics might be another possibility for further research.

Despite these limitations, the strength of this study is in the analysis of the contribution of both attachment and TP upon satisfaction with life. Although the empirical research had broadly examined the influence upon the satisfaction with life played by TP (Boniwell et al., 2010; Drake et al., 2008; Lessing, 1972; Zhang et al., 2013; Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999) and by attachment representations (Armsden and Greenberg, 1987; Bendayan et al., 2013; Jiang et al., 2013; Ma and Huebner, 2008; Nickerson and Nagle, 2004), the present study has highlighted how attachment representations and TP are deeply interrelated, and both contribute to the satisfaction with life.

Some useful clinical implications can be obtained from the present study. An understanding of how adolescents perceive their present and future may provide a basis for developing effective strategies for protecting them from high-risk behaviors (Andretta et al., 2013; Laghi et al., 2013; Mckay et al., 2015; Worrell et al., 2013). Furthermore, considering that the parent and per attachment relationships, and a balanced TP are significant protective factors, the current results could be useful for programs concerned with promoting positive youth development.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Allen

(2008) The attachment system in adolescence. In: Cassidy

Shaver

(eds) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford, pp. 419–435.

Andretta

Worrell

Mello

et al. (2013) Demographic group differences in adolescents’ time attitudes. Journal of Adolescence 36: 289–301.

Armsden

Greenberg

(1987) The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 16: 427–454.

Bartholomew

Horowitz

(1991) Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61: 226–244.

Bendayan

Blanca

Fernández-Baena

et al. (2013) New empirical evidence on the validity of the satisfaction with life scale in early adolescents. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 29: 36–43.

Berlin

Cassidy

Appleyard

(2008) The influence of early attachments on other relationships. In: Cassidy

Shaver

(eds) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Publications.

Bifulco

Kwon

Jacobs

et al. (2006) Adult attachment style as mediator between childhood neglect/abuse and adult depression and anxiety. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 41: 796–805.

Bifulco

Schimmenti

Moran

et al. (2014) Problem parental care and teenage deliberate self-harm in young community adults. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic 78: 95–114.

Boniwell

Osin

Linley

et al. (2010) A question of balance: time perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples. The Journal of Positive Psychology 5: 24–40.

10.

Bowlby J (1980) Attachment and Loss. Vol. 3: Loss: Sadness and Depression. New York: Basic Books.

11.

Bowlby J (1982) Attachment and Loss. Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books (Original work published 1969).

12.

Bowles

(1999) Focusing on time orientation to explain adolescent self-concept and academic achievement: Part II. Testing a model. Journal of Applied Health Behavior 1: 1–8.

13.

Boyd

Zimbardo

(2005) Time perspective, health and risk taking. In: Strathman

Joireman

(eds) Understanding Behavior in the Context of Time, London: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 85–107.

14.

Bretherton I and Munholland K (2008) Internal working models in attachment relationships: Elaborating a central construct in attachment theory. In: Cassidy J and Shaver PR (eds) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 2008, pp. 102–127.

15.

Caprara

Steca

(2005) Affective and social self-regulatory efficacy beliefs as determinants of positive thinking and happiness. European Psychologist 4: 275–286.

16.

Caprara GV and Steca P (2006) The contribution of self-regulatory efficacy beliefs in managing affect and family relationships to positivity and hedonic balance. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 25: 603–627.

17.

Carelli

Wiberg

(2011) Development and construct validation of the Swedish Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 27: 220–227.

18.

Cassidy

Shaver

(1999) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications, New York, NY: Guilford Press.

19.

Cassidy

Shaver

(2008) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

20.

Crowell

Fraley

Shaver

(2008) Measurement of individual differences in adolescent and adult attachment. In: Cassidy

Shaver

(eds) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press, pp. 599–634.

21.

Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ and Griffin S (1985) The Satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment 49: 71–75.

22.

Diener

(1995) Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55: 34–43.

23.

Drake

Duncan

Sutherland

et al. (2008) Time perspective and correlates of wellbeing. Time and Society 17: 47–61.

24.

Ely

Mercurio

(2011) Time perspective and autobiographical memory: Individual and gender differences in experiencing time and remembering the past. Time Society 20: 375–400.

25.

Gorrese

Ruggieri

(2012) Peer attachment: A meta-analytic review of gender and age differences and associations with parent attachment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 41: 650–672.

26.

Greene

DeBacker

(2004) Gender and orientations toward the future: Links to motivation. Educational Psychology Review 16: 91–120.

27.

Gullone

Robinson

(2005) ) The Inventory Of Parent And Peer Attachment-Revised (IPPA-R) for children: A psychometric investigation. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy 12: 67–79.

28.

Havighurst

(1952) Developmental Tasks and Education, New York: Davis McKay.

29.

Jiang

Huebner

Hills

(2013) Parent attachment and early adolescents’ life satisfaction: The mediating effect of hope. Psychology in the Schools 50: 340–352.

30.

Keough

Zimbardo

Boyd

(1999) Who’s smoking, drinking, and using drugs? Time perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 21: 149–164.

31.

Laghi

Baiocco

D’Alessio

et al. (2008) Identity status and time perspective in adolescence. International Journal of Psychology 43: 148.

32.

Laghi

Baiocco

Liga

et al. (2013) Identity status differences among Italian adolescents: Associations with Time perspective. Children and Youth Service Review 35: 482–487.

33.

Laghi

D’Alessio

Pallini

et al. (2009) Attachment representations and time perspective in adolescence. Social Indicators Research 90: 181–194.

34.

Laghi

Liga

Baumgartner

et al. (2012) Time perspective and psychosocial positive functioning among Italian adolescents who binge eat and drink. Journal of Adolescence 35: 1277–1284.

35.

Laghi

Pallini

D’Alessio

et al. (2011) Development and validation of the efficacious self-presentation scale. Journal of Genetic Psychology 172: 209–219.

36.

Laible

Carlo

Raffaelli M (2000) The differential relations of parent and peer attachment to adolescent adjustment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 29: 45–59.

37.

Lessing

(1972) Extension of personal future time perspective, age, and life satisfaction of children and adolescents. Developmental Psychology 6: 457–468.

38.

Lewinsohn

Rohde

Seeley

et al. (2003) Psychosocial functioning of young adults who have experienced and recovered from major depressive disorder during adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 112: 353–363.

39.

Ma CQ Huebner

(2008) Attachment relationships and adolescents’ life satisfaction: Some relationships matter more to girls than boys. Psychology in the Schools 45: 177–190.

40.

McCabe

Barnett

(2000) First comes work, then comes marriage: future orientation among African American young adolescents. Family Relations 49: 63–70.

41.

McKay

Worrell

Temple

et al. (2015) Less is not always more: The case of the 36-item short form of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences 72: 68–72.

42.

Marshall

Tracy

(2009) After the baby: Work-family conflict and working mothers’ psychological health. Family Relations 58: 380–391.

43.

Mello

Worrell

(2006) The relationship of time perspective to age, gender, and academic achievement among academically talented adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 29: 271–289.

44.

Nada Raja

McGee

Stanton

(1992) Perceived attachment to parents and peers and psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 21: 471–485.

45.

Nickerson

Nagle

(2004) The influence of parent and peer attachments on life satisfaction in middle childhood and early adolescence. Social Indicators Research 66: 35–60.

46.

Pace

(2014) Assessing attachment representations among adoptees during middle childhood and adolescence with the Friend and Family Interview (FFI): Clinical and research perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology 5: 1–4.

47.

Pace

San Martini

Zavattini

(2011) The factor structure of the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA): A survey of Italian adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences 51: 83–88.

48.

Pace

Zavattini

(2011) Adoption and attachment theory: The attachment models of adoptive mothers and the revision of attachment patterns of their late-adopted children. Child: Care, Health and Development 37: 82–88.

49.

Pace

Zavattini

D’Alessio

(2012) Continuity and discontinuity of attachment patterns: A short-term longitudinal pilot-study of late-adopted children and their adoptive mothers. Attachment and Human Development 14: 45–61.

50.

Pace CS, Zavattini GC and Tambelli R (2015) Does family drawing capture attachment representations of late-adopted children? A preliminary report. Child & Adolescent Mental Health 20: 26–33.

51.

Ruijten

Roelofs

Rood

(2011) The mediating role of rumination in the relation between quality of attachment relations and depressive symptoms in non-clinical adolescents. Journal of Child Family Studies 20: 452–459.

52.

Schimmenti A and Bifulco A (2015) Linking lack of care in childhood to anxiety disorders in emerging adulthood: the role of attachment styles. Child & Adolescent Mental Health 20: 41–48.

53.

Steca

Caprara

Tramontano

et al. (2009) Young adults’ life satisfaction: The role of self-regulatory efficacy beliefs. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 28: 824–861.

54.

Tambelli

Laghi

Odorisio

et al. (2012) Attachment relationships and internalizing and externalizing problems among Italian adolescents. Children and Youth Service Review 34: 1465–1471.

55.

Thompson

(2008) Attachment-related mental representations: Introduction to the special issue. Attachment and Human Development 10: 347–358.

56.

Usunier

Valette-Florence

(2007) The Time Styles Scale: A review of developments and replications over 15 years. Time Society 16: 333–366.

57.

Worrell

Mello

(2007) The reliability and validity of Zimbardo Time Perspective scores in academically talented adolescents. Educational and Psychological Measurement 67: 487–504.

58.

Worrell

Mello

Buhl

(2013) Introducing English and German versions of the Adolescent Time Attitude Scale (ATAS). Assessment 4: 496–510.

59.

Zhang

Howell

(2011) Do time perspectives predict unique variance in life satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personality and Individual Differences 50: 1261–1266.

60.

Zhang

Howell

Stolarski

(2013) Comparing three methods to measure a balanced time perspective: The relationship between a balanced time perspective and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies 14: 169–184.

61.

Zimbardo

Boyd

(1999) Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 1271–1288.

62.

Zimbardo

Keough

Boyd

(1997) Present time perspective as a predictor of risky driving. Personality and Individual Differences 23: 1007–1023.