PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 1

Personality and Attachment Styles: Their Impact on Mobile Phone Use in Uncomfortable Situations

Stephanie Getzinger

Psy 323
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 2

Abstract

Many individuals of society resort to their mobile phones as an escape or source of

avoidance when experiencing uncomfortable situations. There were 34 individuals (7 males, 27

females) that participated in the study. During the study, the experimenter pretended to get into an

argument with another experimenter on the phone, intending to create an uncomfortable setting for

the experimental participants. Four surveys were administered to measure the results of both

conditions. Insecurely attached individuals and those with an introverted personality type were

observed to use their mobile phones more than those with a secure attachment style or extroverted

personality type. Thus, the personality type and/or attachment style of an individual affects their

level of mobile phone use.

PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 3

Awkward situations can be very uncomfortable, and many individuals tend to seek out

easier ways of communicating with others due to social pressures. What makes people more likely

than others to rely on technology, such as text messaging or mobile phones, for social purposes?

Do personality types and attachment styles among individuals make them feel more uncomfortable

in awkward situations, causing them to turn to different forms of communication when interacting

with others? Thus, do these factors motivate individuals to communicate through technology rather

than through face-to-face interaction? Finally, can mobile phones be used as an escape or a

source of avoidance as a result of social discomfort from uncomfortable surroundings?

Text Massaging Through the Use of Mobile Phones

Humans are social beings, and they communicate through a number of different ways, one

of which is through mobile devices that allow individuals to text message. The popularity and

number of those who own a mobile phone in numerous countries across the world have been

increasing throughout the years. One would agree that the ability for an individual to type a brief

message on his/her cell phone and another to receive it within seconds has helped make life a lot

easier when communicating. With constant advancements in technology, text messaging has

become one of the most popular and most preferred types of communication among teenagers

today. The increase in popularity of text messaging among teenagers may be due to the fact that

texting has made communication more convenient and easier for a number of reasons.

Personality Types and Text Messaging

The personality type of an individual may not only predict if one uses a mobile phone or

not, but may also influence the amount of ones mobile phone use as well. There are two major

personality types that define individuals, extroversion and introversion. Individuals who have a

more extroverted personality tend to be open to new experiences, optimistic, and willing to

participate in social interactions. In contrast, introverted individuals prefer to be alone, usually

PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 4

express little emotion, and are often not interested in engaging in social interactions with others

(Koch & Pratarelli, 2004). Since introverts tend to be less socially active, confrontation and face-to-

face interactions often make these particular individuals uncomfortable. Research shows that

introverts turn to technology for social purposes due to the fact that they may view virtual

relationships as less risky than close, formal ones (Koch & Pratarelli, 2004). Thus, by expressing

themselves in a less-confrontational way, the amount of awkwardness between individuals is

reduced, making the interaction more comfortable to engage in. In the study conducted by Koch

and Pratarelli (2004), introverts were reported being more comfortable using technology for social

interactions than extroverts due to the fact that technology provides a non-threatening environment

for rejection and social pressures. Other research has supported the idea that extroverts have a

high use of mobile communication as well. However, extroverted individuals have high rates of

mobile use due to their high numbers of social connections since they have outgoing personalities

and tend to be open to relationships with others (Lane & Manner, 2011). Thus, they do not rely on

technology to communicate with others due to uncomfortable confrontation as introverts do. Based

on the information provided, it can be concluded that, although both personality types have high

levels of mobile use, introverts rely on technology for social purposes related to uncomfortable

interactions whereas extroverts have high levels of mobile use due to many social connections.

Attachment Styles and Social Discomfort

Not only do individuals of society develop different personality types, but they develop

different attachment styles as well. There are three major attachment styles that children

experience between themselves and their caregivers that may affect the type of adults they

become. The first is secure attachment style. Individuals with a secure attachment have close

social support from friends and family. These individuals have the most flexible communication

patterns and social skills, much like extroverts (Jones, 2005). The second is anxious-resistant
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 5

attachment style, which the individual tends to be clingy, dependent, and immature due to

abandoning behaviors of the caregiver (Randolph, Brown Smart, & Nelson, 1997). The last is

avoidant attachment style. According to Randolph et al. (1997), this attachment style is caused by

insensitive caregivers, and it causes individuals to be unreliable and have trouble trusting others.

Since individuals with secure attachment styles have well-developed social skills, they are less

likely to use their phone to avoid social pressures or discomfort. Those who have an avoidant or

anxious attachment style are more likely to use text messaging to avoid a conversation they

believe would be uncomfortable having in person, as well as using their mobile phone as a source

of avoidance in an uncomfortable situation.

Personality Types in Relation to Attachment Styles

Research has supported that there is a relationship between parent/child interactions and

the development of ones personality (Randolph et al., 1997). Individuals who have an extroverted

personality type tend to have a secure attachment style as well. According to one study

(Donnellan, Burt, Levendosky, & Klump, 2007), results showed that extroversion and secure

attachment style were positively correlated. Thus, those with secure attachment styles may be

less likely to use technology for communicational purposes because they often do not perceive the

social pressures that individuals with anxious-resistant and avoidant attachment styles experience

during face-to-face interactions. In contrast, individuals with avoidant and anxious-resistant

attachments tend to have a more introverted personality type. This was supported by further

research from the study conducted by Donnellan et al. (2007), which revealed that these people

are uncomfortable with intimacy and strive for independence in relationships. Therefore,

individuals with anxious-resistant and avoidant attachment styles are more likely to seek alternative

forms of communication rather than engaging in face-to-face interactions which they would find

uncomfortable.
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 6

Hypothesis and Study Overview

Previous research has shown that different personality traits and attachment styles among

individuals impact their form of communication in order to reduce social stress. Therefore, our

hypothesis states that individuals who have an extroverted personality type and secure attachment

style are less likely to use mobile technology for social purposes or in certain uncomfortable

situations. Accordingly, individuals who have an introverted personality type and insecure

attachment styles are more likely to use mobile technology for social purposes or in certain

uncomfortable situations. To test this prediction, the study put the experimental group in an

awkward situation in which the experimenter pretended to get into an argument with another

experimenter on the phone. Four surveys were administered to measure and compare the results

of the experimental group and the control group.

Method

Participants

Participants consisted of graduate and undergraduate college students, as well as a few

faculty employees. There were 34 individuals (7 males, 27 females) that participated in the study.

For each time slot, typically 3-5 individuals participated. The control group consisted of 22

participants, and 12 participants were randomly assigned to the experimental group. After

completing the study, participants were given credit forms to verify that they took part on the study

and to receive course credit for their participation.

Procedure

Participants sat at whichever desk they desired as they arrived in the study room. After

reading and signing the consent form, the researcher exposed participants to either a controlled

situation or an awkward/uncomfortable situation. A coin was flipped before the study began to

determine if the study was going to be controlled or experimental. Participants who were assigned
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 7

to the experimental group were exposed to the uncomfortable situation, whereas participants who

were part of the control group were not exposed to any manipulated situation. After the consent

forms were signed, the researcher made a pretend phone call to her experimental partner asking

why he had not yet brought the credit slips to the study room. Both researchers argued back and

forth on the phone, while the researchers aggression and tone of voice was meant to make the

participants feel uncomfortable, which served as the manipulation. The researcher apologized to

the individuals and asked them to please excuse her as she went to fetch the credit slips from the

lab room. While the researcher was gone for approximately two minutes, a confederate was

recording the behaviors of the participants. To make sure the individuals natural responses were

not influenced by being aware that they were being observed, the confederate played the role of an

individual participating in the study. Participants behaviors were collected by tallies as the

confederate paid close attention to their amount of mobile phone use and verbal/nonverbal

interaction with one another. After the researcher returned, surveys were distributed to the

participants, including the confederate, which measured individuals personality type, attachment

style, mobile phone usage, and reaction to discomfort. In contrast to the experimental group, the

researcher simply stated to the control group that she had forgotten the slips and would return back

to the room once she had grabbed them from the lab room. The confederate observed participants

and collected data the same way the data was collected for the experimental group. Both groups

were treated identically, except for exposure to the independent variable. At the end of the study, a

debriefing took place in which the researchers explained the hypothesis, conditions, and any

deception that was necessary for the study to collect accurate data.

Measures

One of the surveys the participants received measured social discomfort. This survey contained 6

items that were created by the experimenters to help understand how well the manipulation made the
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 8

participants feel uncomfortable. This survey was used as the manipulation check to make sure that the

independent variable was effective. The survey included questions such as I felt uncomfortable at one or

more points of this study, and from the moment the researcher began the study, there was nothing that I

felt uncomfortable about. The response scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). See

appendix A for full social discomfort survey.

Personality was measured with the 10 item Big Five Inventory scale (Rammstedt & John,

2007), including extroversion, agreeableness, conscientious, neuroticism, and openness. In this

scale, extroversion was measured with statements such as I see myself as someone who is

outgoing, sociable, and I see myself as someone who is reserved, which was a reversed

extroversion item. Similar to the social discomfort survey, the response scale ranges from 1

(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Attachment styles were measured using the 12 item Experiences in Close Relationship

Scale-Short Form (Wei, Russell, Mallinckrodt, & Vogel, 2007). This survey was used to determine

which attachment style best fit the participant being questioned, such as secure, anxious, or

avoidant. The survey included questions such as I turn to my partner for many things, including

comfort and reassurance, and I am nervous when partners get too close to me. This response

scale also ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Participants were also given a survey regarding their dependence on mobile phone use

during awkward/uncomfortable situations, as well as their amount of mobile phone use in general.

The survey contained 14 items, including questions such as I often use my cell phone as an exit

during uncomfortable situations, and I often turn to text messaging to interact with others in

situations that I believe interacting with them in person would be uncomfortable. This survey

measured the responses using the same scale as the rest of the surveys, ranging from 1 (strongly

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). See appendix B for full mobile phone survey.
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 9

Lastly, behaviors of the individuals were recorded to measure observed mobile phone use

and observed interaction between the participants after the experimenter left the room following the

manipulation. The behaviors recorded were has phone set out near them, looks at/touches phone,

uses phone, verbal interaction, and nonverbal interaction. For every behavior that was done by the

individual, a tally mark was made according to that behavior. These measures helped distinguish if

there was a possible correlation between personality type/attachment style and mobile phone

use/social interaction in either an uncomfortable situation or typically normal situation.

Results

Preliminary Statistics

The variables were analyzed by averaging the scores of different response items. These

variables were labeled social discomfort(SD), observed use(U), observed interaction(I), and

reported mobile phone use(MP). Attachment styles(A) consisted of twelve items ( = .78). In order

to determine if participants were secure or insecure, attachment style was split at the median.

Personality types(P) consisted of ten items ( = .41). Similar to attachment, personality type was

split at the median as well to determine if participants were extroverted or introverted. Social

discomfort consisted of six items ( = .64). A t-test was used to analyze the manipulation check,

which showed that there was a significant main effect between the experimental group and control

group regarding social discomfort. Participants of the experimental group, who experienced the

uncomfortable situation, reported higher levels of discomfort than the control group that was not

affected by the uncomfortable condition, (2.00 vs. 1.41), t(32) = -2.31, p = .03.

Primary Hypothesis

It was predicted that individuals with an extroverted personality type and secure

attachment style are less likely to resort to their phone for social purposes or in certain

uncomfortable situations, whereas individuals with an introverted personality type and insecure
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 10

attachment styles are more likely to resort to their phone for social purposes or in certain

uncomfortable situations. To calculate the data that was collected, univariate analysis of variance

helped compare the different variables being measured to attachment styles and personality traits

in order to see if there were any existing main effects or interactions.

Although there were variables that had a nonsignificant main effect on another, there were

four main significant results and one significant interaction collected from the study that supported

the hypothesis. Attachment style of the participants had a significant main effect on observed

mobile phone use [(M = 1.98 vs. .50), F(1,30) = 5.35, p = .03] (see Table 1); where individuals with

an insecure attachment style used their mobile phones significantly more than those having a

secure attachment style. However, attachment had a nonsignificant main effect on interaction [(M

= 1.12 vs. .58), F(1,30) = 1.70, p = .20] and reported mobile phone use [(M = 2.89 vs. 3.18),

F(1,30) = 1.85, p = .18]. Secondly, personality type had a significant main effect on observed

mobile phone use [(M = 2.52 vs. .81), F(1,30) = 7.73, p = .01]. This illustrated that introverted

participants used their phones more than extroverted participants regardless if they were in the

experimental or control condition. Personality had a nonsignificant main effect on both interaction

[(M = .77 vs. .88), F(1,30) = .06, p = .81] and reported mobile phone use [(M = 3.10 vs. 2.99),

F(1,30) = .23, p = .64]. Also, condition of the two groups had a marginally significant main effect on

observed interaction [(M = 1.33 vs. .38), F(1,30) = 5.31, p = .03]; where individuals who were

exposed to the uncomfortable situation interacted with one another more than individuals who

experienced a typically normal social situation. Condition had a nonsignificant main effect on

observed use [(M = 1.27 vs. 1.21), F(1,30) = .01, p = .93], as well as a nonsignificant main effect on

reported mobile use [(M = 3.01 vs. 3.06), F(1,30) = .07, p = .80]. Finally, there was a significant

interaction between condition and personality type [(M = 3.75 vs. 1.29, 1.36, .25), F(1,30) = 8.56,
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 11

p = .01], meaning that introverts of the experimental group used their phones more than introverts

in the control condition, extroverts in the control condition, and extroverts of the experimental.

Discussion

It was predicted that individuals with an introverted personality type and insecure

attachment style would resort to their mobile phones more than those with an extroverted

personality type and secure attachment style. Due to the data analysis results, it was found that

the hypothesis was supported because insecurely attached people and those with an introverted

personality type were observed to use their mobile phones more than those with a secure

attachment style or extroverted personality type. As predicted, introverted individuals used their

mobile phones more frequently in an uncomfortable social situation than extroverted individuals, as

well as in a typically normal social situation. Thus, it can be supported that social discomfort

among individuals with different personality types and attachment styles plays a role in an

individuals amount and/or frequency of mobile phone use when present in an uncomfortable

situation.

The results collected in this study were similar to results collected in other studies

measuring personality, attachment, mobile phone use, and social discomfort. Similar research has

stated that introverted individuals have higher levels of mobile phone use than extroverted

individuals since they view it as less risky than face-to-face interactions due to the anxiety

associated when communicating with others in person (Koch & Pratarelli, 2004). Other research

has shown that individuals with a secure attachment style tend to have more flexible

communication patterns and social skills, making them more comfortable interacting with others

face-to-face (Jones, 2005). The data of this study supported research collected from similar

studies because the manipulation check was effective in confirming that those randomly assigned

to the experimental group felt uncomfortable since they reported high amounts of social discomfort.
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 12

Since it was observed that the introverted individuals of the experimental group used their phones

more frequently and rated high on social discomfort, it can be supported that they turned to their

phones as a source of avoidance to the awkwardness they experienced from the manipulation.

There were a few problems that occurred throughout the study that may have influenced

the results. First, the fact that personality type had a significant main effect on observed mobile

phone use but not on reported mobile phone use could mean that the mobile phone survey did not

successfully measure what it was supposed to. Observed phone use was measured based on

individuals present behaviors, which explains why introversion had a significant main effect on

observed mobile phone use. However, the survey questions regarding individuals phone use were

based on past, rather than present, feelings and experiences. Secondly, it was common that fellow

students from Dr. Lanes class participated in the study for extra credit. Being aware that the

confederate playing the role of a participant was in fact an experimenter made familiar participants

recognize that there was some sort of deception. Thus, it is possible that demand characteristics

influenced the results if this awareness caused these individuals to attempt to figure out the

deception or hypothesis. Having an idea of what the hypothesis was, they may respond in a

certain way to intentionally support or deny what they believe the hypothesis might be. Also, the

study should have been designed differently to eliminate the possible chance of experimenter bias,

requiring that the confederate could not enter the room until after the manipulation had already

taken place. Being that the confederate would not be aware of which condition participants at the

time are assigned to, observations being collected would not be unconsciously affected by

expectations caused by the hypothesis and past research. Lastly, the experimenter who had been

continuously exposing the experimental group to the manipulation was unable to make it to all of

the studies. Even though there was a script being used, the substitute experimenter creating the
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 13

uncomfortable situation may have used a different tone of voice, or other nonverbals, that could

have possibly affected the level of social discomfort perceived by the participants.

An additional perspective that a subsequent study may want to include would be exploring

the relationship between mobile phone use during uncomfortable situations and the other four

personality types measured in the Big Five Inventory survey that was distributed to individuals.

Besides extroversion, the questionnaire also included characteristics such as agreeableness,

conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. The type of personality traits that make up an

individual play a distinct role in guiding ones behavior. Thus, these characteristics may also

impact an individuals mobile phone use during uncomfortable situations, just as they do with any

other behavior. This research can be used in society as a means to understand how individuals

with different personality traits and attachment styles differ in behavior and sensitivity to social

discomfort.

How an individual of society behaves and thinks determines the type of personality and

attachment style that best defines that individual. The personality type and/or attachment style of

an individual affects how he/she will perceive a situation as being typically normal or

uncomfortable. These two factors also affect the way the individual will react in certain situations,

whether it be normal or uncomfortable. Although introverted and insecurely attached individuals of

society feel uncomfortable under social pressures, it is important for them to discover certain ways

in which they can make interacting face-to-face with others easier.

PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 14

References

Donnellan, M. B., Burt, S. A., Levendosky, A. A., & Klump, K. L. (2007). Genes, personality, and

attachment in adults: A multivariate behavioral genetic analysis. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 34(3). doi: 10.1177/0146167207309199

Jones, S. M. (2005). Attachment style differences and similarities in evaluations of affective

communication skills and person-centered comforting messages. Western Journal of

Communication, 69(3), 233-249.

Koch, W. H., & Pratarelli, M. E. (2004). Effects of intro/extraversion and sex on social internet use.

North American Journal of Psychology, 6(3), 371-382.

Lane, W., & Manner, C. (2011). The impact of personality traits on smartphone ownership and use.

International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(17), 22-28.

Rammstedt, B. & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short

version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in

Personality, 41, 203-212.

Randolph, D. L., Brown Smart, T. K., & Nelson, W. (1997). The personality research form as a

discriminator of attachment styles. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12(1), 113-

127.

Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The experiences in Close

Relationship Scale (ECR)-Short Form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of

Personality Assessment, 88, 187-204.

PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 15

Table 1

Difference of Observed/Reported Behavior between Conditions Regarding Personality Types and

Attachment Styles

Observed Use Experimental Control

Insecure 2.43 (.67) 1.54 (.49)

Secure 0.00 (.79) 1.00 (.59)
Extroversion 3.75 (.81) 1.29 (.43)
Introversion 0.25 (.57) 1.38 (.57)

Observed Interaction Experimental Control

Insecure 0.86 (.43) 0.31 (.32)

Secure 1.80 (.51) 0.44 (.38)
Extroversion 1.25 (.59) 0.29 (.31)
Introversion 1.25 (.41) 0.50 (.41)

Reported Use Experimental Control

Insecure 3.23 (.23) 3.14 (.17)

Secure 2.90 (.27) 2.88 (.20)
Extroversion 3.10 (.30) 3.11 (.16)
Introversion 3.09 (.22) 2.90 (.22)
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 16

Appendix A
Social Discomfort Survey
Response Questionnaire

On a scale of 1 to 5, please rate how much you agree with the following statements.

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree

_____ 1. I feel totally at ease while participating in this study.

_____ 2. I felt uncomfortable at one or more points of this study.
_____ 3. The researchers made the atmosphere socially uncomfortable to me.
_____ 4. No part of participating in this study has been awkward for me.
_____ 5. From the moment the researcher began the study, there was nothing that I felt
uncomfortable about.
_____ 6. The researchers actions, tone of voice, or body language made me feel uncomfortable at
one or more points of this study.
PERSONALIY AND ATTACHMENT ON MOBILE USE 17

Appendix B
Mobile Phone Use Survey
Response Questionnaire

On a scale of 1 to 5, please rate how much you agree with the following statements.

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree

_____ 1. I feel lost without my cell phone.

_____ 2. If I leave the house without my phone, I will go back and grab it.
_____ 3. I often turn to text messaging to interact with others in situations that I believe interacting
with them in person would be uncomfortable.
_____ 4. I often leave my cell phone at home when I go out.
_____ 5. I often use my cell phone as an exit during uncomfortable situations.
_____ 6. I primarily use my cell phone for texting.
_____ 7. I primarily use my cell phone for talking on the phone.
_____ 8. I primary use my cell phone for social media (i.e., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram).
_____ 9. I primarily use my cell phone for information purposes.
_____ 10. If I believe a conversation will be awkward/uncomfortable in person, I will use text
messaging to discuss the topic.
_____ 11. I rarely turn to my phone as an exit if I am in an uncomfortable or awkward situation.
_____ 12. I feel that my personality affects my amount of mobile phone use.
_____ 13. I feel as though non-verbal communication (text messaging/instant messaging) is the
most comfortable way for me to socially interact with others.
_____ 14. I feel uncomfortable when I am in social situations and have to speak with people face to
face or talk on the phone.