Abstract
Specific relational risk conditions may increase vulnerability to dysfunctional, coercive, or unsafe intimate relationships in adulthood. Pathological Affective Dependence (PAD) and Fear of Intimacy (FoI) represent two clinically relevant relational conditions associated with difficulties in adult intimacy. PAD is characterized by the perceived need to preserve the relational bond at all costs, even when the relationship is harmful or highly costly. FoI is characterized by avoidance of emotional closeness and defensive distancing from intimacy. Although recent research has linked these patterns to relational dysfunction and intimate partner violence risk, little is known about the attachment profiles, early relational experiences, and affective–cognitive mechanisms that differentiate PAD and FoI. The present study addressed this gap by examining, for the first time, PAD and FoI within a shared framework of attachment, recalled parental styles, and self- versus other-focused threat processes. Specifically, we aimed to (a) characterize adult attachment profiles and early relational experiences associated with PAD and FoI and (b) test whether shame and paranoia function as distinct mechanisms indexing negative views of the self versus others. A community sample of 245 adults (M = 31.9) completed measures of PAD, FoI, adult attachment, recalled parental styles (indifference, overcontrol, abuse), external shame, and paranoid ideation. PAD was uniquely associated with fearful attachment, whereas FoI was positively related to dismissing and negatively to secure attachment. Parental overcontrol and indifference predicted both outcomes; paternal overcontrol was especially relevant for PAD, and parental indifference for FoI. Mediation analyses supported distinct pathways: overcontrol was associated with higher shame, which in turn was associated with higher PAD, whereas indifference was associated with higher paranoia, which in turn was associated with higher FoI. Findings clarify PAD and FoI as distinct but related relational risk configurations and suggest tailored intervention targets to promote healthier intimacy and affect regulation.
Links
BibTeX (Download)
@article{Papa2026d,
title = {Too Far, Too Close: Attachment and Early Relational Correlates of Pathological Affective Dependence and Fear of Intimacy},
author = {Carolina Papa and Erica Pugliese and Claudia Perdighe and Francesco Mancini and Marcela Matos },
editor = {Wiley Online Library},
url = {https://apc.it/2026-mancini-too-far-too-clos/},
doi = {doi.org/10.1111/sjop.70132},
issn = {0036-5564},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-07-08},
urldate = {2026-07-08},
journal = {Scandinavian Journal of Psychology},
abstract = {Specific relational risk conditions may increase vulnerability to dysfunctional, coercive, or unsafe intimate relationships in adulthood. Pathological Affective Dependence (PAD) and Fear of Intimacy (FoI) represent two clinically relevant relational conditions associated with difficulties in adult intimacy. PAD is characterized by the perceived need to preserve the relational bond at all costs, even when the relationship is harmful or highly costly. FoI is characterized by avoidance of emotional closeness and defensive distancing from intimacy. Although recent research has linked these patterns to relational dysfunction and intimate partner violence risk, little is known about the attachment profiles, early relational experiences, and affective–cognitive mechanisms that differentiate PAD and FoI. The present study addressed this gap by examining, for the first time, PAD and FoI within a shared framework of attachment, recalled parental styles, and self- versus other-focused threat processes. Specifically, we aimed to (a) characterize adult attachment profiles and early relational experiences associated with PAD and FoI and (b) test whether shame and paranoia function as distinct mechanisms indexing negative views of the self versus others. A community sample of 245 adults (M = 31.9) completed measures of PAD, FoI, adult attachment, recalled parental styles (indifference, overcontrol, abuse), external shame, and paranoid ideation. PAD was uniquely associated with fearful attachment, whereas FoI was positively related to dismissing and negatively to secure attachment. Parental overcontrol and indifference predicted both outcomes; paternal overcontrol was especially relevant for PAD, and parental indifference for FoI. Mediation analyses supported distinct pathways: overcontrol was associated with higher shame, which in turn was associated with higher PAD, whereas indifference was associated with higher paranoia, which in turn was associated with higher FoI. Findings clarify PAD and FoI as distinct but related relational risk configurations and suggest tailored intervention targets to promote healthier intimacy and affect regulation.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
