Full Text:

INTRODUCTION

The interaction with the primary caregiver (mostly the mother) in the first years of life is thought to have a relatively critical impact on peoples’ lives. Attachment theory examines the relationship between infant and primary caregiver and explains the development of personality on the basis of this relationship (1,2). Attachment is defined in the broadest sense as ‘emotional bond developed to a special person’ (1-3). The need for emotional bonding is highly functional for the survival and developmental course of the newborn (4-7). The emotional bond established with the primary caregiver also serves as a “secure base” that allows for the child to explore the surroundings (3,8,9).

The attachment pattern based on the emotional interaction between the mother and the infant during early childhood maintains its impact also in adulthood (10), affecting the individual’s mental health and behaviors.

Not least thanks to the effects of positive psychology, psychological research is increasingly focusing on the importance of life satisfaction (11). Life satisfaction is a component of subjective well-being (12) and a positive indicator of mental health (13). Experimental studies emphasize the protective mechanism of life satisfaction against negative effects of stress and the development of psychological disorders (14). Moreover, while high levels of life satisfaction are associated with happiness and good living conditions (15), low levels of life satisfaction are associated with depression and unhappiness (11). Substantial evidence suggests that attachment styles are the key determinants of subjective well-being (16). It is seen that individuals with secure attachments have high self-esteem with both increased academic achievements and life satisfaction (17).

Studies show that attachment has a direct impact on life satisfaction (17-19). Psychological resilience is defined in the most general sense as the ability to adapt to stressful and difficult conditions. Psychological resilience, also conceptualized as ‘stress-resistant attitude’, represents the ability to cope with unfavorable situations (20,21). The theories explaining psychological resilience based on the developmental process actually take into consideration the relationship established by the child with the primary caregiver. Therefore, psychological resilience is based on the child’s early attachment relationships (21,22). While attachment theorists assume that secure attachment enhances psychological resilience (23,24), only a limited number of studies have examined the relationship between attachment and resilience (25). Several studies reported that psychological resilience was also associated with a high level of life satisfaction (26). This study primarily aimed to examine the relationship of attachment styles (anxious and ambivalent) of university students to their life satisfaction and psychological resilience levels. Another aim of the study was to see whether the life satisfaction of university students differs according to psychological resilience levels. Finally, the study also aimed to examine the distribution of attachment dimensions among university students.

METHOD

The study population consists of university students enrolled in various faculties at state and private universities of Turkey in the academic year 2016-2017. Convenience sampling was used in selecting the sample. For this purpose, classes were chosen randomly in the psychology department of Fatih Sultan Mehmet Foundation University. Responses to the measurement tools were obtained on a voluntary basis. At Bogazici University, two courses that were mandatory for all departments such as History or Turkish were randomly selected and student volunteers completed the scales. The scale items were also prepared in online format to improve generalizability of the study. Online questionnaires were distributed among university students via Google Docs; in this way, student volunteers participated in the study. Out of 425 participating students, 71.1% were female and 28.9% were male. The age range in the sample including undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral students was between 18 and 39 years (Mean=22:50, SD=3.26). While the majority of students (70.8%) were studying at private universities, 28.5% were studying at state universities and 0.7% at other (unidentified) universities. Distribution of the study population by faculties showed that 65.9% were from a faculty of science and letters, 9.6% from an engineering faculty, 7.5% from a faculty of economics and administrative sciences, 4.5% from a faculty of education, 2.4% from a faculty of health sciences, 1.6% from a theological faculty, 1.2% from a faculty of law, 0.9% from a faculty of communication, and 6.1% from other faculties. Most of the study population (86.4%) consisted of undergraduate students, whereas 10.1% and 3.5% of students were enrolled in master’s and Ph.D. programs, respectively.

Measures

This study was approved by the ethics committee of Fatih Sultan Mehmet Foundation University. The measurement tools used in the current study were administered individually to the students at Fatih Sultan Mehmet Vakif University and Bogazici University. In addition, students at other universities were reached via Google Docs, where those who agreed to participate voluntarily filled in online surveys. Confidentiality was observed during administration and informed consent was obtained from all students participating in the study. It took approximately 15-20 minutes for the student participants to complete the questionnaire.

Demographic Information Form: The demographic information form prepared by the researcher according to the purpose of the study is composed of 16 questions about participants’ gender, age, marital status, university and department where they studied, financial status, the environments where they mostly live in, birth order, academic achievement, educational status of their parents, relationships with their friends, and perceived peer influence.

Experiences in Close Relationships Scale II (ECRS-II): In this study, ECRS-II was utilized, which is commonly used for determining attachment styles in adults and has a high measurement sensitivity. Developed by Fraley et al. (27) in 2000, ECRS-II was prepared as a 7-point Likert-type scale. It consists of 36 items, measuring two subscales: anxiety about attachment (18 items) and avoidance of attachment (18 items). The odd-numbered items measure the anxiety dimension and the even-numbered items the avoidance dimension. Two different total scores are obtained from the scale, varying between 18 and 126 for each sub-dimension. An increase in the scores of the subscales indicates an increase of anxiety or avoidance of attachment, respectively (27).

The Turkish validity and reliability study of the scale was performed by Selcuk et al. (28) Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be 0.90 for the avoidance dimension and 0.86 for the anxiety dimension. It was also reported that ECRS-II had a high test-retest reliability, which was 0.81 for the avoidance dimension and 0.82 for the anxiety dimension. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were detected as 0.88 for both anxious attachment and avoidant attachment in this study.

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS): SWLS was developed by Diener et al. (15) in 1985. The scale, which aims to measure general life satisfaction, consists of five items and each item is answered according to a rating system of seven. An increase in the scores of the scale indicates that general life satisfaction is increasing. The Turkish adaptation of the scale was performed by Koker (29). The item-test correlations of the Turkish form of the scale vary between 0.71 and 0.80. The test-retest coefficient was found to be 0.85 (29). Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale was detected to be 0.83 in this study.

Resilience Scale for Adults (RSA): RSA was developed in 2003 by Friborg et al. (30). The scale consists of five sub-dimensions. These dimensions are: (1) personal strength; (2) structured style; (3) social competence; (4) family cohesion; and (5) social resources. In a study by Friborg et al. (30) in 2005, the personal strength sub-dimension was further divided into two sub-dimensions, ‘perception of self’ and ‘perception of future’, eliciting a six-factor structure.

The Turkish adaptation of the scale was performed by Basim and Cetin (31). The total Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the original scale is 0.86. Internal consistency coefficients for the sub-dimensions of the scale range from 0.66 to 0.81. Test-retest reliability values range from 0.68 to 0.81. The reliability of the scale was determined as 0.81. The scale has a six-factor structure that overlaps with the original scale (31). The internal consistency coefficient was found to be 0.89 in the current study. Internal consistency coefficients of the subscales were calculated between 0.59 and 0.78.

Statistical Analysis

SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences for Windows) Version 21.0 was used for the statistical analysis of the data obtained from the data collection tools. Student’s t test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to see whether demographic variables differed with respect to anxiety and avoidance dimensions, satisfaction with life, and psychological resilience. In addition, one-way ANOVA was used to assess the differentiation in the life satisfaction scores according psychological resilience levels. Chi-square test and correlation and multiple regression analyzes were performed to assess the relationship of independent variables (anxious-avoidant attachment) with dependent variables (satisfaction with life, psychological resilience, alexithymia). It was examined whether the assumptions of multiple regression analysis were met, and the data were found to exhibit normal distribution. Since the correlation coefficients between the predictor variables ranged from 0.372 to 0.374, it was determined that there was no multi-collinearity problem. Multi-collinearity was also examined in terms of variance inflation factors (VIF<10), tolerance value (Tolerance>0.20), and condition index (CI<30). Residual values were studies with Mahalonobis distances and a multivariable normality was assumed.

RESULTS

Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 39 (Mean=22.50 SD=3.26). The university students participating in the study were asked about the education levels of their parents. While 38.4% (n=163) of the mothers were primary school graduates, 39.3% (n=167) of the fathers were university graduates.

Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of the study population in terms of scores obtained from different scales. ECRS-II has two dimensions (anxiety and avoidance), whereas RSA has six sub-dimensions. Descriptive statistics expressing means and standard deviation values of sub-dimensions are provided in Table 1.

Anxiety and avoidance sub-dimensions of ECRS-II, which is applied for measuring participants’ attachment styles, were divided into two groups based on their median scores. For anxious attachment, those having a score of below 64.00 were categorized as non-anxiously attached while those above 64.00 were classed as anxiously attached. For avoidant attachment, those having a score of below 56.00 were defined as having a non-avoidant attachment pattern whereas those above 56.00 were defined as having an avoidant attachment pattern. According to these criteria, the analysis showed that 49.4% of participants (n=210) had an avoidant attachment pattern and 48.9% (n=208) an anxious attachment pattern. Subjects who had low scores from both anxious and avoidant attachment dimensions were labeled with a secure attachment pattern (n=135).

The mean score for psychological resilience of securely attached individuals was 99.23 with a standard deviation of 0.52. The satisfaction with life scores of securely attached participants had a mean value of 25.49 with a standard deviation of 0.50.

Participants’ scores for psychological resilience and satisfaction with life were divided into two groups based on their median scores. Chi-square independence test, which was performed to determine whether there was an association between avoidant attachment patterns and level of psychological resilience (low-high), showed no significant association between avoidant attachment and resilience (χ2=1.858, p>0.05). Chi-square independence test, performed to determine whether there was an association between anxious attachment patterns and level of psychological resilience, also revealed no significant association between anxious attachment and resilience (χ2=1.001, p>0.05).

Chi-square independence test showed a significant relationship between avoidant attachment patterns and level of satisfaction with life (low-high) among university students (χ2=18.737, p<0.001) and also demonstrated a significant association between anxious attachment and satisfaction with life (χ2=14.785, p<0.001).

Pearson correlation analysis was performed to determine whether there was a linear relationship between dependent and independent variables. The findings showed that sex, perceived academic achievement, the ECRS avoidance sub-dimension, and satisfaction with life were associated with each other (p<0.05). Order of birth was found to be positively correlated with academic achievement (p=0.007, p<0.05). Financial status, the place where they had spent most of their lives (p=0.016, p<0.05), parents’ education level (p<0.001, p<0.001), and relationships with friends (p=0.001, p<0.01) were positively associated with life satisfaction (p<0.001, p<0.01) and negatively associated with psychological resilience (p=0.006, p<0.01). As the economic level increases, people are more likely to live in urban centers and big cities. The universities (state or foundation) of the students were associated with their satisfaction with life at a level of p=0.040, p<0.05, with psychological resilience at a level of p=0.028, p<0.05 and with attachment-avoidance sub-dimension scores at a level of p=0.007, p<0.05. While there was a significant positive correlation of relationship with friends with satisfaction with life, it was negatively associated with the anxiety-avoidance dimensions of attachment. As the number of close friends of the people increases, satisfaction with life rises and insecure attachment levels decrease. There was no significant relationship between sex and psychological resilience (p=0.063) and the anxious attachment sub-dimension (p=0.808). Nevertheless, sex is significantly associated with satisfaction with life (p=0.014, p<0.05) and the avoidant attachment sub-dimension (p<0.001, p<0.01). There is a significant relationship between age and psychological resilience (p=0.001, p<0.01). In the analyses regarding satisfaction with life, we examined by one-way ANOVA whether the differences between satisfaction with life and its potential independent variables (academic achievement, perceived economic level, perception of future, relationships with friends, education level, self-esteem, psychological resilience) were significant. The findings of these analyses are shown in Table 2.

A significant difference was found between the groups in the total scores of satisfaction with life with respect to the level of academic achievement (high-intermediate-low), (F[2,420]=6.78; p=0.001). Analysis of Levene’s homogeneity of variance indicates that the variances are homogeneous (p=0.873). Bonferroni test was performed for post-hoc analysis. Satisfaction with life was found to be significantly higher in patients with a high level of perceived academic achievement (Mean=24.36, SD=6.18) than in those with an intermediate (Mean=23.15, SD=6.21) and low (Mean=19.79, SD=6.04) level of academic achievement. Analysis of the total scores of satisfaction with life based on perceived economic level (low-middle-high) revealed that there was a significant difference between the groups (F[2,420]=33.072, p<0.001). Levene’s homogeneity of variance analysis shows that the variances are not homogeneous (p=0.003). Accordingly, satisfaction with life differs among university students in terms of perceived economic level. Examining the mean difference of total scores of perception of the future sub-dimension of RSA and satisfaction with life shows a significant association (F[1,419]=16.123, p=0.000). Levene’s homogeneity of variance reveals that variances are homogeneous (p=0.453).

For the relationship with friends, a significant difference between the groups was seen (F[13,409]=2.510, p=0.003). Analysis of Levene’s homogeneity of variance shows that variances are homogeneous (p=0.068). Findings show that satisfaction with life is significantly higher for those with more than one close friend (Mean=24.04, SD=5.99). A significant difference was also found between education level (undergraduate, master, doctorate) and satisfaction with life (F[2,420]=4.185, p=0.016). Analysis of Levene’s homogeneity of variance shows that variances are homogeneous (p=0.348). Mean scores of satisfaction with life were higher (Mean=27.33, SD=5.51) in participants who study for their doctorate compared to undergraduates and master’s students.

One-way ANOVA was performed to test whether satisfaction with life differs according to psychological resilience levels. The total scores of psychological resilience were divided into three groups: 1 standard deviation below the mean, the mean, 1 standard deviation above the mean. There is a significant difference between satisfaction with life scores in terms of psychological resilience level (F[2,420]=4.896, p=0.008). Analysis of Levene’s homogeneity of variance shows that variances are homogeneous (p=0.550). As the level of psychological resilience rises, satisfaction with life increases. Bonferroni test was performed for post-hoc analysis. Satisfaction with life scores of the group with high psychological resilience (Mean=25.39, SD=6.49) were found to be significantly higher than those with low psychological resilience (Mean=21.5217, SD=5.42). These findings suggest that satisfaction with life differs among university students, based on their psychological resilience levels.

The anxiety and avoidance dimensions of attachment that are thought to have an effect on “satisfaction with life”, one of the indicators of subjective well-being, were tested to disclose the presence of such an effect using the “enter” method in multiple regression analysis. The analysis shows that anxious and avoidant attachment accounts for 11% of the variance in satisfaction with life. It was observed that insecure attachment dimensions were significantly associated with life satisfaction (R=0.338, R2=0.115), and anxiety and avoidance sub-dimensions of attachment were found to be a significant predictor of satisfaction with life (F[2,420]=27.162, p<0.001). The increase in satisfaction with life was detected to be related to the reduction in anxious and avoidant attachment scores. The relative significance of the predictor variables with respect to the standardized regression coefficients (ß) is anxious attachment (ß=-0.235) and avoidant attachment (ß=-0.172). The regression analysis results regarding prediction of satisfaction with life by attachment dimensions are given in Table 3.

A multiple regression analysis was conducted to show that the anxiety and avoidance sub-dimensions of attachment predicted the total score of the RSA, one of the indicators of psychological resilience. This analysis showed no significant associations of either anxious or avoidant attachment dimensions with psychological resilience (R=0.092, R2=0.008) and attachment sub-dimensions were not found to be a significant predictor of psychological resilience (F[2,422]=1.805, p>0.05). The regression analysis results regarding prediction of psychological resilience by attachment dimensions are given in Table 4.

DISCUSSION

This study aims to examine the distribution of university students’ attachment dimensions and the relationship of insecure attachment patterns to satisfaction with life and psychological resilience. Analyzes performed in view of the aims of the study indicate that most of the university students exhibit insecure attachment (anxiety-avoidant) patterns. The level of satisfaction with life is significantly lower in insecurely attached individuals than that in securely attached people. Another aim of the study is to see whether the life satisfaction of university students differs by their psychological resilience levels. Our findings indicate that satisfaction with life differs depending on psychological resilience levels, increasing with a higher level of satisfaction with life. Similar to previous studies, the presence of a two-way relationship between life satisfaction and psychological resilience may be suggested (26). The relationship between the perception of future sub-dimension of the RSA and satisfaction with life was also investigated. Several studies reported a relationship between university students’ expectations about the future and the satisfaction with their lives. It was reported that life satisfaction was increased among those who perceived a positive future (32). This finding is supported by the current study.

Satisfaction with life is thought to be related to academic achievement (33). This hypothesis resembles the results of the studies performed by Tov and Diener (12) and Proctor et al. (11). Because of concerns about the future, university students consider their academic achievements as an important factor for the ability to create their professional identities (32).

According to Vitters, the personality characteristic of extroversion is closely related to subjective well-being (32). Dost (32), who studied the differentiation of life satisfaction of university students according to their level of loneliness, reported that the level of loneliness increased with reduced satisfaction with life. In this study, relationship with friends were investigated to measure the association between loneliness and life satisfaction. The latter was significantly higher in those with multiple close friends than those without. Analyses to determine whether there is a significant relationship between sex and satisfaction with life seem to remain controversial. While there are studies showing that life satisfaction differs according to sex (32), some others report that there is no significant association between sex and satisfaction with life (34). The results obtained from this study show that the life satisfaction of female participants is significantly higher than that of their male counterparts. According to Diener, socio-economic status is one of the main factors affecting satisfaction with life (35). In this study, perceived economic status was also found to be related to satisfaction with life, in accordance with the findings in the study by Proctor et al. (11).

Numerous studies regarding satisfaction with life indicate that attachment relationships are key determinants of subjective well-being (16). The study by Hwang et al. (17) shows that satisfaction with life is high among securely attached individuals. A substantial number of studies indicate that attachment has a direct impact on satisfaction with life (17,18). In this study, it was observed that there was a significant relationship of anxious and avoidant attachment dimensions with life satisfaction; and these dimensions of attachment were found to be significant predictors of satisfaction with life. Findings of the current study support previous reports in the literature. In this context, therapeutic modalities that target disturbances in the attachment system or focus on an improvement of family relationships in an attachment-oriented manner, such as attachment-based family therapy, may help to increase individuals’ overall satisfaction with life.

The relationship between psychological resilience and attachment has been examined in a limited number of studies. Theories that attempt to explain psychological resilience during the developmental process suggest that supportive and reassuring family interaction in early childhood shapes the child’s ability to withstand challenging situations in adulthood (35,21). In this context, studies by Kurilova (22) and Jenkins (21) reveal that anxiety and avoidance dimensions of attachment (36,37) negatively correlate with psychological resilience. These studies suggest anxious attachment to be an important predictor of resilience, yet no such predictive ability is reported for avoidant attachment. The hypothesis that attachment styles predict psychological resilience was not confirmed by the current study. The fact that avoidant attachment did not predict psychological resilience supports the results in the literature. Further studies to be performed with different populations are needed to test the relationship between attachment styles and resilience.

In conclusion, attachment styles appear to be closely related to satisfaction with life in adulthood. On the other hand, as individuals’ satisfaction with life rises, the level of adaptation to stress and resilience also increases. It is thought that psychotherapeutic interventions that are directed to modulate emotions, improve the environment of trust between personal relationships, and help coping with stress will enhance secure attachment, overall satisfaction with life, and psychological resilience.

Informed Consent: Written consent was obtained from the participants.

Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.

Conflict of Interest: Authors declared no conflict of interest.

Financial Disclosure: Authors declared no financial support.

REFERENCES

1. Ainsworth MD. Object relations, dependency, and attachment: a theoretical review of the infant-mother relationship. Child Dev 1969; 40:969-1025. [CrossRef]

2. Ainsworth MD. Patterns of attachment behavior shown by the infant in interaction with his mother. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development 1964; 10:51-58.

3. Bowlby J. Attachment and Loss. Volume I, Attachment. Second ed. New York: Basic Books; 1969.

4. Ainsworth MD, Blehar MC, Waters E, Wall S. Patterns of Attachment. A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Second ed. New York: Psychology Press, 2014.

5. Collins NL, Read SJ. Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. J Pers Soc Psychol 1990; 58:644-663. [CrossRef]

6. Hazan C, Shaver PR. Attachment as an organizational framework for research on close relationships. Psychological Inquiry 1994; 5:1-22. [CrossRef]

7. Schaffer HR, Emerson PE. The development of social attachments in infancy. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev 1964; 29:1-77. [CrossRef]

8. Bowlby J. Attachment and Loss. Volume II. Separation Anxiety and Anger. New York: Basic Books, 1973.

9. Kobak RR, Sceery A. Attachment in late adolescence: working models, affect regulation, and representations of self and others. Child Dev 1988; 1:135-146. [CrossRef]

10. Gillath O, Karantzas GC, Fraley RC. Adult Attachment. A Concise Introduction to Theory and Research. London: Elsevier; 2016.

11. Proctor CL, Linley PA, Maltby J. Youth life satisfaction: a review of the literature. J Happiness Stud 2009; 10:583-630. [CrossRef]

12. Tov W, Diener E. Culture and Subjective Well-Being. In Diener E (editor). Culture and Well-Being. The Collected Works of Ed Diener. New York: Springer; 2009, 9-42. [CrossRef]

13. Steger MF, Oishi S, Kesebir S. Is a life without meaning satisfying? The moderating role of the search for meaning in satisfaction with life judgments. J Posit Psychol 2011; 6:173-180. [CrossRef]

14. Proctor CL, Linley PA. Life Satisfaction in Youth. In Fava GA, Ruini C (editors). Increasing Psychological Well-being in Clinical and Educational Settings, Cross-Cultural Advancements in Positive Psychology. New York: Springer, 2014, 199-215. [CrossRef]

15. Diener E, Diener M, Diener C. Factors Predicting the Subjective Well-Being of Nations. In Diener E (editor). Culture and Well-Being. The Collected Works of Ed Diener. New York: Springer; 2009, 43-70. [CrossRef]

16. Martikainen L. The Family Environment in Adolescence as a Predictor of Life Satisfaction in Adulthood. In Vassar M (editor). Psychology of Life Satisfaction. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2012, 19-30.

17. Hwang K, Johnston MV, Smith JK. Adult attachment styles and life satisfaction in individuals with physical disabilities. Appl Res Qual Life 2009; 4:295-310. [CrossRef]

18. Chen W, Zhang D, Pan Y, Hu T, Liu G, Luo S. Perceived social support and self-esteem as mediators of the relationship between parental attachment and life satisfaction among Chinese adolescents. Pers Individ Dif 2017; 108:98-102. [CrossRef]

19. Guarnieri S, Smorti M, Tani F. Attachment relationships and life satisfaction during emerging adulthood. Soc Indic Res 2015; 121:833-847. [CrossRef]

20. Liu JJW, Reed M, Girard TA. Advancing resilience: an integrative, multi-system model of resilience. Pers Individ Dif 2017; 111:111-118. [CrossRef]

21. Jenkins JK. The Relationship Between Resilience, Attachment, and Emotional Coping Styles. Unpublished Master Thesis, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, 2016.

22. Kurilova J. Exploration of Resilience in Relation to Mindfulness, Self-Compassion, and Attachment Styles. University Of Calgary, Applied Psychology, Unpublished Master Thesis, Alberta, 2013.

23. Bowlby J. A Secure Base. Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development. U.S.A: Basic Books; 1988.

24. Mikulincer M, Shaver PR. Attachment in Adulthood. Structure, Dynamics, and Change. Second ed. New York: The Guilford Press; 2016.

25. Bartley M, Head J, Stansfeld S. Is attachment style a source of resilience against health inequalities at work? Soc Sci Med 2007; 64:765-775. [CrossRef]

26. Kong F, Wang X, Hu S, Liu J. Neural correlates of psychological resilience and their relation to life satisfaction in a sample of healthy young adults. Neuroimage 2015; 123:165-172. [CrossRef]

27. Fraley RC, Waller NG, Brennan KA. An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. J Pers Soc Psychol 2000; 78:350-365. [CrossRef]

28. Selcuk E, Gunaydin G, Sumer N, Uysal A. A new scale developed to measure adult attachment dimensions: experiences in close relationships-revised (ECR-R) - psychometric evaluation in a Turkish sample. Turkish Psychological Articles 2005; 8:1-11. (Turkish)

29. Koker S. Comparison of normal and problematic adolescents in terms of level of satisfaction with life. Specialty Thesis, Ankara University Institute of Social Sciences, 1991. (Turkish)

30. Friborg O, Barlaug D, Martinussen M, Rosenvinge JH, Hjemdal O. Resilience in relation to personality and intelligence. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2005; 14:29-42. [CrossRef]

31. Basim HN, Cetin F. The reliability and validity of the resilience scale for adults-Turkish version. Turk Psikiyatri Derg 2011; 22:104-114. (Turkish)

32. Dost MT. Examining life satisfaction levels of university students in terms of some variables. Pamukkale University Journal of Education 2007; 2:132-143. (Turkish)

33. Civitci A. The relationships between global life satisfaction and psychological needs in university students. Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences 2012; 21:321-336. (Turkish)

34. Comert IT, Ozyesil ZA, Ozguluk SB. Satisfaction with life, meaning in life, sad childhood experiences, and psychological symptoms among Turkish students. Psychol Rep 2016; 118:236-250. [CrossRef]

35. Harrison KE. Evaluating The Interplay Between Attachment and Resilience on Adult Relationship. Unpublished Master Thesis, San Diego State University Master of Arts in Communication, 2015.

36. Sumer N, Gungor D. Psychometric evaluation of adult attachment measures on Turkish samples and a cross-cultural comparison. Turkish Journal of Psychology 1999; 14:71-106. (Turkish)

37. Bartholomew K, Horowitz LM. Attachment styles among young adults: a test of a four-category model. J Pers Soc Psychol 1991; 61:226-244. [CrossRef]