Shame: the ingenious quilt relatedness) into their comparisons between attachment style and significance of distress (Wei et al., 2005, p. 592). They found that attachment avoidance was not significantly related statistically to shame, depression and loneliness (Wei et al., 2005, p. 598). However, they did find a significant statistical relationship between the distressors and attachment anxiety (ibid.). In describing this outcome, they use the recognisable language of shame (ibid.):
Individuals with high levels of attachment anxiety tend to have a negative working model of self and are more likely to suppress or be unaware of their basic psychological needs because they have learned that these needs are part of what makes them unlovable. [Emphases added.]
Attachment theory suggests that this is because a person with attachment anxiety has a negative self-image and a negative view of others (Cozolino, 2006; Wei et al., 2005). By contrast, the person whose attachment style is avoidant has a positive view of self and a negative view of others (Cozolino, 2006; Wei et al., 2005). A person‘s self-image is the key where shame is under consideration (Lewis, 1995; 2003).
In 2003 Sohlberg, Claesson and Birgegard, using a controlled experiment that tested the effect on subjects of the subliminal message ―Mommy and I are one‖ (Mommy), reported findings that reiterated attachment theory, stating that the ―data are clearly compatible with a link between early relationships and adult functioning‖ (p. 344). Besides the Mommy phrase, they used an intended shaming phrase ―I am completely isolated‖ (Isolated) alongside a neutral control ―People are walking‖ (People), and
22