Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 276280

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

The relationship between adult romantic attachment and compliance

Gisli H. Gudjonsson a,*, Jon Fridrik Sigurdsson b, Linda Bara Lydsdottir c, Halldora Olafsdottir b
a
Department of Psychology (PO 78), Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, England, UK
b
Division of Psychiatry, University of Iceland/Landspitali-University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland
c
Division of Psychiatry, Landspitali-University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Compliance has been mainly researched in the context of custodial interrogation and peer pressure to
Received 9 January 2008 commit offences. In the present study compliance was studied in relation to adult romantic attachment.
Received in revised form 30 March 2008 It was hypothesized that the relationship between compliance and romantic attachment would be stron-
Accepted 8 April 2008
gest with maladaptive attachment and lowest with secure attachment. Three hundred and seventy seven
Available online 3 June 2008
pregnant women attending antenatal clinics at Primary Health Care Centres completed the Gudjonsson
Compliance Scale (GCS), the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale,
Keywords:
and the Multi-item measure of adult Romantic Attachment, which consisted of Anxious and Avoidant
Adult romantic attachment
Compliance
dimensions (and additional quadrant framework consisting of Secure, Preoccupied, Dismissing, and Fear-
Self-esteem ful attachment types). Compliance was signicantly related to both Anxious and Avoidant attachment
Depression after controlling for self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and stress. A further analysis showed that compli-
Anxiety ance was highest among the Fearful type and lowest among the Secure type. The ndings suggest that
Stress compliance is an important factor in relation to maladaptive adult romantic attachment.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction immediate instrumental gain (pp. 535536). Within this deni-

The concept of compliance is central to the study of social inu-
ence (Bond & Smith, 1996). The purpose of the present paper is to
investigate the relationship between compliance, as measured by
the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (GCS; Gudjonsson, 1989,
1997), and adult attachment. The previous work carried out on
the GCS has focused primarily on compliance in interrogative situ-
ations (Gudjonsson, 2003, 2006; Sigurdsson & Gudjonsson, 1996)
and susceptibility to being led, manipulated or pressured into
criminal activity (Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson, 2004, 2007). More re-
cently it has also focused on the vulnerabilities of certain groups to
comply with pressure from others, such as patients with persecu-
tory delusions (Levy & Gudjonsson, 2006), patients with Aspergers
Syndrome (North, Russell, & Gudjonsson, in press), and the pres-
ence of symptoms of Attention Decit Hyperactivity Disorder
(ADHD) (Gudjonsson, Sigurdsson, Einarsson, Bragason & Newton,
in press-a). Anxiety, low self-esteem and introversion have been
shown to be moderately correlated with compliance (Gudjonsson
& Sigurdsson, 2003; Gudjonsson, Sigurdsson, Brynjolfsdottir, &
Hreinsdottir, 2002; Gudjonsson, Sigurdsson, & Einarsson, 2004),
and these may explain some of the group differences found.
Gudjonsson (1989) denes compliance as the general ten-
dency or susceptibility of individuals to comply with requests
and obey instructions that they would rather not do, for some
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 20 78480768; fax: +44 20 78480680.
E-mail address: g.gudjonsson@iop.kcl.ac.uk (G.H. Gudjonsson).
tion compliance can occur in different situations. Gudjonsson, Sig-
urdsson, Einarsson and Einarsson (in press-b) argue that although
there are important distinctions between compliance in imper-
sonal (e.g. during custodial interrogation) and personal (e.g. com-
plying with the request of a close friend or a loved person)
settings, both are signicantly related to the broader psychological
construct of compliance. For example, a principal component anal-
ysis of a specially constructed Situational Compliance Scale (SCS)
showed that personal and impersonal relationship types of compli-
ance items loaded on separate factors, but both correlated signi-
cantly with the GCS. The underlying psychological constructs were
thought to reect eagerness to please and avoidance of conict and
confrontation, which are the two factors that load most highly on
the GCS (Gudjonsson, 1989). However, the authors argued that fear
of emotional rejection and/or abandonment may also play an
important part in the motivation behind compliance within per-
sonal relationships. Loving relationships, whether passionate or
companionate, both have important attachment-related func-
tions, which may be threatened by fear of rejection and abandon-
ment (Reis & Aron, 2008).
There is evidence that an attachment theory framework can be
used to investigate individual differences in compliant behaviour.
For example, Impett and Peplau (2002) studied the relationship
of compliance with unwanted sex among women and attachment
styles of Anxiety and Avoidance. Anxiously attached women most
commonly consented to unwanted sex and often cited fears that
their partner would lose interest in them if they did not comply

0191-8869/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.04.010
 G.H. Gudjonsson et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 276280
with their request for sex. Some of the reasons given for consenting
to unwanted sex (e.g. feeling obliged to have sex with a partner,
fear of rejection, nding it easier to engage in sex than saying
no), suggested that both anxiety and avoidant attachment styles
are relevant to studying compliant behaviour. Attachment styles
have been shown to be highly stable from infancy into early adult-
hood, although they are subject to change depending upon salient
life experiences (Waters, Merrick, Treboux, Crowell, & Albersheim,
2000).
Bartholomew (1990) suggests four attachment types: Secure,
Preoccupied, Dismissing and Fearful. Only the Secure type is associ-
ated with a positive emotion. Insecure attachments are partly
mediated by low self-esteem, with the Preoccupied and Fearful
types being associated with lower self-esteem than the Secure
and Dismissing types (Pickering, Simpson, & Bentall, 2008). Picker-
ing et al. found that paranoid beliefs, but not hallucinations, were
associated with insecure attachment. Negative self-esteem, the
anticipation of a threatening event, and a perception of others as
powerful, mediated the relationship between attachment insecu-
rity and persecutory paranoia.
Brennan, Clark, and Shaver (1998) have reduced Bartholomews
four types into two dimensions: Anxiety (fear of rejection and
abandonment) and Avoidance, which is made up of discomfort with
closeness and emotional dependency. Brennan et al. (1998) devel-
oped a 38-item questionnaire, which measures the Anxiety and
Avoidance dimensions in adult romantic attachment. Four clusters
can also be obtained to calculate the number of people who fall
into each of Bartholomews four types (Secure, Preoccupied, Dis-
missing and Fearful).
The research question being asked in this study is whether
there is a signicant relationship between certain adult attach-
ment types (i.e. Anxiety and Avoidance and Bartholomews four
types) and compliance, as measured by the GCS. Since compliance,
as measured by the GCS, is principally related to eagerness to
please and avoidance of conict and confrontation (Gudjonsson,
1989), we hypothesized that high negative emotions to do with
adult attachment (i.e. high on Avoidant and Anxious attachments)
will correlate positively with compliance. In addition, using Bar-
tholomews four types we hypothesized that out of the four types
compliance will be highest among the Fearful type, which is com-
prised of high Avoidance and high Anxiety, and lowest among the
Secure type (i.e. Low Avoidance and Low Anxiety). In view of pre-
vious research showing a signicant relationship between compli-
ance, anxiety and self-esteem (Gudjonsson et al., 2002), we
included in the present study the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales
(DASS; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem
Scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965). This will assist us in understanding
the relative contribution of each variable to compliance.
2. Methodology
2.1. Participants
The participants were 377 pregnant women attending antenatal
clinics at ten Primary Health Care Centres in Reykjavik, Iceland.
Their mean age was 29 years (SD = 4.9, range 1844). The partici-
pants had completed a number of tests as a part of a national study
into the mental health and wellbeing of women during and after
pregnancy, and protective factors, such as interpersonal relation-
ships and secure attachment.
2.2. Measures
The Multi-item measure of adult Romantic Attachment (MMARA;
Brennan et al., 1998). This is a 36-item inventory, which is rated
277
on a 7-point scale (1 = disagree strongly to 7 = agree strongly),
which contains two independent subscales Avoidance (Al-
pha = 0.94) and Anxiety (Alpha = 0.91). Each subscale consists of
18 items. The correlation between the two scales is low
(r = 0.11). The Avoidance scale measures discomfort with inter-
personal closeness and disclosure, avoidance of intimacy, and need
for self-reliance. The Anxiety subscale measures preoccupation
with attachment and relationships, jealousy, clinging to partners,
and fear of rejection and abandonment. Fear of rejection and aban-
donment are central to the concept of Anxiety attachment.
Brennan et al. (1998) used the two higher-order factors, roman-
tic anxiety and avoidance, to cluster participants into Bartholo-
mews (1990) four attachment types according to guidelines
suggested by Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and Black (1995) and pro-
vide a statistical formula for categorizing the scores obtained on
the 38-item scale into the four attachment types: Secure, Preoccu-
pied, Dismissing and Fearful. This additional cluster based catego-
rization was used in the present study to provide a more detailed
analysis of the relationship between compliance and attachment
types.
In view of the nature of the sample we chose to investigate
romantic (i.e. intimate and domain specic) attachment rather
than using a global measure of attachment.
The English version of the Scale was translated into Icelandic
and then back translated from Icelandic into English by another
translator.
The Gudjonsson Compliance Scale (GCS; Gudjonsson, 1989, 1997).
This is a 20 item self-report scale which measures the extent to
which an individual is prone to comply with the requests of others.
The GCS is comprised of true/false statements. Scores range from 0
to 20, with a higher score indicating greater compliance. The Scale
was developed for two different purposes. First, to identify persons
who are susceptible to making a false confession under interroga-
tive pressure. Secondly, to identify those who are susceptible to
being pressured into crime by peers and others. The Scales validity
has been documented in both of these areas (Gudjonsson, 2003,
2006; Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson, 2007). The Cronbachs alpha coef-
cients have ranged between 0.71 and 0.75 in different studies
(Gudjonsson, 2003).
Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS; Lovibond & Lovibond,
1995). This is a 42-item self-report measure of depression, anxiety
and stress. Each item is rated on a four point scale (03; never,
sometimes, often, nearly always) and indicates how much each
statement applied to the participant during the previous week.
The three subscales, each consisting of 14 items, have been shown
to have good reliability and convergent and discriminant validity
(Crawford & Henry, 2003; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). The range
of possible scores for each of the three subscales is between 0
and 42.
The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965). This
10-item scale consists of positive and negative self-appraisal state-
ments rated on a four point scale ranging from strongly agree to
strongly disagree. Scores range from 10 to 40 with higher scores
reecting low self-esteem. The scale has good reliability and valid-
ity (Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson, 2003).
2.3. Procedure
This is a part of a larger study on pre- and post-natal depression
in Iceland. The pregnant women were approached when they at-
tended the rst check-up at a Primary Health Care Centre in Rey-
kjavik around the 12th week of pregnancy and asked to
participate in a study of pre- and post-natal depression and the
development of their children from birth to ve years of age. They
were provided with information about the study which they took
home with them and when they attended the next check-up ses-
278 G.H. Gudjonsson et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 276280

sion, at around the 16th week of pregnancy, they signed a consent Table 2
form and completed the psychological tests, which were adminis- Summary of multiple regression analysis (hierarchical) for the psychological variables
predicting compliance
tered primarily in order to screen for pre-natal depression. This
was the rst of at least eight appointments they agreed to keep Predictor variables Beta t-value Adjusted R2
during the next ve years. Block 1
The study was approved by the National Bioethics Committee, Depression 0.06 0.76 Block1
the Icelandic Data Protection Authority, the Landspitali-University Anxiety 0.06 0.90 0.23***
Stress 0.15 1.93 F(4, 344) = 26.59
Hospital in Reykjavik and the Primary Health Care Authorities. Self-esteem 0.40 6.98***
Block 2
3. Results Depression 0.11 1.40
Anxiety 0.04 0.64 Block 2
Stress 0.11 1.45 0.26***
Table 1 shows the mean scores on the psychological tests, the Self-esteem 0.33 5.61*** F(2, 342) = 7.30
Cronbach Alpha for each test, and the correlations between the test Romantic attachment anxiety 0.15 2.56*
scores. All the test scores correlated signicantly (r = 0.280.74). Romantic attachment avoidance 0.12 2.11*
The highest correlations were between the three subscales of the *
p < 0.05.
DASS scale, Depression, Anxiety and Stress scales (r = 0.640.74). ***
p < 0.001.
The GCS correlated moderately with MMARA Anxiety (r = 0.37)
and Avoidance (r = 0.35). It also correlated with self-esteem
(r = 0.47). All the measures had a satisfactory Cronbach Alpha
(0.760.90). ful (p < 0.001) and Preoccupied (p < 0.001) types. The effect sizes in
In order to investigate how much each of the variables, depres- compliance between the Secure and Fearful and Preoccupied types
sion, anxiety, stress, self-esteem and romantic anxiety and avoid- were 1.03 (high) and 0.62 (moderate), respectively (Cohen,
ance (predictor variables), contributed to the variance in 1988).
compliance, hierarchical multiple regression, using forced entry
method, was carried out. Compliance was used as the dependent 4. Discussion
measure in the analysis. Depression, anxiety, stress, and self-es-
teem were entered simultaneously in the rst block and anxiety The present ndings support the hypothesis formulated in Sec-
and avoidance attachment were added in the second block. In both tion 1. Compliance is signicantly related to maladaptive attach-
the regression analyses the collinearity diagnostics were adequate ment as measured by the MMARA. Both the Anxiety and
(minimum tolerance = .36). As Table 2 shows, both models were Avoidance attachment measures were associated with compliance.
signicant. In Block 1 only self-esteem contributed signicantly As far as the four Bartholomews types are concerned, the partici-
to the variance in compliance, but in Block 2, self-esteem and pants in the Secure attachment group, as predicted, were signi-
romantic attachment anxiety and avoidance all contributed signif- cantly less compliant than the Fearful and Preoccupied types.
icantly to the model. These are important ndings. The main implication is that women,
The number of participants who fell into Bartholomews four who are insecure in terms of their attachment, are more likely to
types were as follows: Secure (N = 242, 67%), Fearful (36, 10%), Pre- be compliant in terms of their personality. This makes them poten-
occupied (56, 16%), and Dismissing (25, 7%). Table 3 gives the mean tially more vulnerable to comply with unreasonable requests or
scores for the psychological tests according to the four types. Mul- demands in personal and impersonal relationships. In terms of
tivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was performed on the personal relationships their insecurity may result in them not
ve dependent variables (compliance, self-esteem, depression, being able to stand up to their partner (e.g., giving in to unreason-
anxiety and stress) and four independent variables (Secure, Fearful, able requests), which could put a strain on their relationship
Preoccupied, and Dismissing) to test for overall signicant effects (Gudjonsson et al., in press-b). The present ndings suggest the
after taking into effect the relationship between the dependent relationship between attachment and compliance is partially med-
measures. There was an overall signicant group effect (Pillais iated by self-esteem, although after controlling for self-esteem in a
trace = 0.29; F = 7.00, p < .001; partial eta squared = 0.10). Univari- hierarchical analysis, anxious and avoidant attachments still pre-
ate analyses were then carried out on each of the dependent vari- dicted compliance.
ables and the results are given in Table 3. Signicant differences The nding that the Fearful type scored highest on all the psy-
between the four attachment types emerged on all the psycholog- chological measures in the present study, suggests that they have
ical measures. On all the psychological tests the scores were high- the greatest number of psychological problems, including anxiety,
est with regard to the Fearful type and lowest on the Secure type depression and low self-esteem. This ts in well with the nding of
(all were signicant according to Sheff tests). For compliance, Brennan et al. (1998) that the Fearful type scored highest of all four
the Secure type differed signicantly on Sheff tests from the Fear- groups on a scale measuring negative postcoital emotions. This

Table 1
Mean scores, standard deviations, Cronbach Alpha, and correlations between the tests

Psychological test Mean (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Romantic attachment anxiety 2.9 (1.0) 0.46* 0.37* 0.47* 0.46* 0.39* 0.44*
2. Romantic attachment avoidance 2.3 (0.9) 0.35* 0.44* 0.49* 0.36* 0.46*
3. Compliance 9.8 (3.5) 0.47* 0.31* 0.28* 0.35*
4. Self-esteem 16.6 (5.3) 0.55* 0.41* 0.51*
5. Depression 3.3 (4.7) 0.64* 0.74*
6. Anxiety 3.0 (4.0) 0.66*
7. Stress 7.1 (6.1)
Cronbach alpha 0.87 0.89 0.76 0.88 0.90 0.82 0.90
*
p < 0.001.
 G.H. Gudjonsson et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 276280 279

Table 3
Mean scores and standard deviations on the psychological tests in each of Bartholomews attachment types

Psychological scale Secure Fearful Preoccupied Dismissing F- value

Mean (SD) (N) Mean (SD) (N) Mean (SD) (N) Mean (SD) (N)
Bartholomews attachment types
Compliance 8.9 (3.1) (241) 12.1 (3.1) (36) 11.1 (4.0) (56) 10.5 (3.6) (25) 14.26*
Self-esteem 15.2 (4.4) (237) 20.9 (5.9) (34) 19.3 (5.7) (55) 18.0 (6.3) (24) 21.06*
Depression 2.0 (2.8) (236) 8.0 (8.1) (34) 5.2 (5.4) (54) 4.7 (5.4) (24) 25.88*
Anxiety 2.0 (2.4) (237) 5.9 (7.2) (35) 5.0 (4.3) (56) 3.5 (4.5) (24) 18.66*
Stress 5.5 (5.0) (233) 11.9 (8.5) (35) 9.9 (6.2) (53) 9.3 (5.6) (24) 20.08*
*
p < 0.001 level.

type is also more likely to comply with unwanted sex (Impett & Pe-
plau, 2002).
Gudjonsson et al. (in press-b) argue in relation to their research
into differences between personal and impersonal relationship
compliance that the thought of wishing to decline the request of
a loved one, and the associated fear of emotional rejection, gener-
ates a state of mindlessness, followed by increased compliance.
Impett and Peplaus (2002) ndings support this hypothesis. They
found that anxiously attached women were overly sensitive to
rejection and consented to unwanted sex as a way of avoiding con-
ict and confrontation with a partner, which supports the previous
ndings of Downey, Freitas, Michaelis, and Khouri (1998).
In the present study, the Fearful and Preoccupied types were
most compliant, which suggests that it is the combination of fear
of rejection/abandonment, and insecurities in romantic relation-
ships, which is linked to susceptibility to compliance. Of course,
the present ndings are limited to romantic attachment, but there
is likely to be an overlap with insecure attachment in other rela-
tionships (Waters et al., 2000).
Indeed, Pickering et al. (2008), using the Bartholomew and
Horowitz (1991) relationship questionnaire (RQ), which also mea-
sures attachment both categorically and dimensionally, found that
paranoid beliefs were signicantly elevated among the Fearful and
Preoccupied types in a similar way as found for compliance in the
present study. The key mediating variable for both attachment
anxiety and avoidance was negative self-esteem. Wearden, Peters,
Berry, Barrowclough, and Liversidge (2008), using the Psychosis
Attachment Measure (PAM) for measuring global attachment
(romantic attachment was deliberately excluded), found that after
controlling for the confounding effect of negative affect, negative
self-evaluative core beliefs were signicantly correlated with anx-
ious attachment but not with avoidant attachment.
In the present study, attachment anxiety and avoidance were
moderately correlated (r = .46, p < 0.001), which is in contrast to
previous studies using the MMARA (r = .11; Brennan et al., 1998),
the RQ (r = .11; Pickering et al., 2008), and the PAM (r = .08; Wear-
den et al., 2008). One possible explanation for the moderately high
correlation between anxiety and avoidance attachment styles in
the present study relates to the sample studied (i.e. pregnant wo-
men). It is possible that their pregnancy affected the attachment
scores. It is noteworthy that the proportion of women who fell into
the Secure category (67%) in the present study is high in compari-
son to previous studies (e.g. Brennan et al., 1998; Pickering et al.,
2008).
Bartholomews four types of attachment can be construed as a
quadrant framework similar to that described within Eysencks
theory of personality (Brand, 1997; Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975).
Using Eysencks quadrant framework, Gudjonsson et al. (2004)
found that unstable (anxious) introverts were most compliant in
their temperaments and stable extraverts the least compliant. In
the present study, the Fearful quadrant is made of a combination
of high Anxiety and high Avoidance from the MMARA, whereas
the reverse was for the Secure type (i.e. low Anxiety and low
Avoidance). It would be interesting in future research to investi-
gate how Eysencks quadrant framework overlaps with that of Bar-
tholomews four types. The present ndings suggest that there may
be considerable overlap between the two quadrant frameworks;
adult romantic attachment may be closely linked to personality
where stable extraverts t into the Secure type and unstable-intro-
verts into the Fearful type.
The present study has a number of limitations, including the
sample (i.e. pregnant women), the self-report nature of the nd-
ings, and the fact that adult attachment is measured in the context
of romantic (specic domain) rather than as a general attachment
predisposition. In spite of these limitations, the present ndings
provide important new results, which are consistent with the re-
cent work of Pickering et al. (2008) into insecure attachment and
paranoia and employing a more global measure of attachment
among male and female university students.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the research assistants,
orbjrg Sveinsdttir, Ptur Ingi Ptursson and Mara Hrnn Nik-
ulsdttir, for organizing the data collection and computing the
data, midwives in the Primary Health Care of the Capital Area for
their co-operation and assistance with collection of the data, and
the pregnant women for their participation. The authors are grate-
ful to the Icelandic Centre for Research (Grant No. 050427021), the
Landspitali Science Fund, the Wyeth Research Fund, and the Uni-
versity of Iceland Research Fund, for nancial support.
References
Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment perspective. Journal
of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 147178.
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults:
A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61,
226244.
Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies
using Aschs (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 119,
111137.
Brand, C. R. (1997). Hans Eysencks personality dimensions: Their number and
nature. In H. Nyborg (Ed.), The scientic study of human nature (pp. 1735).
Oxford: Elsevier.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult
attachment. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close
relationships (pp. 4676). New York: Guildford Press.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, New
Jersey: Erlbaum.
Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2003). The Depression anxiety stress scales (DASS):
Normative data and latent structure in a large non-clinical sample. British
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 111131.
Downey, G., Freitas, A. L., Michaelis, B., & Khouri, H. (1998). The self-fullling
prophecy in close relationships: Rejection sensitivity and rejection by romantic
partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 545560.
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck personality
questionnaire. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1989). Compliance in an interrogation situation: A new scale.
Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 535540.
Gudjonsson, G. H. (1997). The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales Manual. Hove:
Psychology Press.
280 G.H. Gudjonsson et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 276280
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A
handbook. Chichester: John Wiley.
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2006). Disputed confessions and miscarriages of justice in
Britain: Expert psychological and psychiatric evidence in court of appeal. The
Manitoba Law Journal, 31, 489521.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Sigurdsson, J. F., Einarsson, Bragason, O. O., & Newton, A. K. (in
press-a), Interrogative suggestibility, compliance and false confessions among
prison inmates and their relationship with Attention Decit Hyperactivity
Disorder (ADHD) symptoms. Psychological Medicine.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Sigurdsson, J. F., Einarsson, E., & Einarsson, J. H. (in press-b),
Emotional versus impersonal relationship compliance and their relationship
with personality. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology.
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2003). The relationship of compliance with
coping strategies and self-esteem. European Journal of Psychological Assessment,
19, 117123.
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2004). Motivation for offending and
personality. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9, 6981.
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2007). Motivation for offending and
personality. A study among young offenders on probation. Personality and
Individual Difference, 43, 12431253.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Sigurdsson, J. F., Brynjolfsdottir, B., & Hreinsdottir, H. (2002). The
relationship of compliance with anxiety, self-esteem, paranoid thinking and
anger. Psychology, Crime and Law, 8, 145153.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Sigurdsson, J. F., & Einarsson, E. (2004). Compliance and
personality. The vulnerability of the unstable-introvert. European Journal of
Personality, 18, 435443.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data
analysis, with readings (4th ed.). Englewood Oiffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Impett, E. A., & Peplau, L. A. (2002). Why some women consent to unwanted sex
with a dating partner: Insights from attachment theory. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 26, 360370.
Levy, S., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2006). The relationship between paranoid delusions
and compliance. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 17, 563
576.
Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the depression anxiety stress
scales. Sydney: Psychology Foundation.
North, A., Russell, A., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (in press). Interrogative suggestibility and
compliance in Aspergers syndrome: Potential vulnerability during police
interview. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology.
Pickering, L., Simpson, J., & Bentall, R. P. (2008). Insecure attachment predicts
proneness to paranoia but not hallucinations. Personality and Individual
Difference, 44, 12121224.
Reis, H. T., & Aron, A. (2008). Love. What is it, why does it matter, and how does it
operate? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 8086.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent child. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Sigurdsson, J. F., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (1996). Psychological characteristics of false
confessors. A study among Icelandic prison inmates and juvenile offenders.
Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 321329.
Waters, E., Merrick, S., Treboux, D., Crowell, J., & Albersheim, L. (2000). Attachment
security in infancy and early adulthood: A twenty-year longitudinal study. Child
Development, 71, 684689.
Wearden, A., Peters, I., Berry, K., Barrowclough, C., & Liversidge, T. (2008). Adult
attachment, parenting experiences, and core beliefs about self and others.
Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 12461257.