To Die for a Cause But Not for a Companion: Attachment-Related Variations in the Terror Management Function of Self-Sacrifice

In 8 studies, we examined the terror management function of self-sacrifice and the moderating role of attachment orientations. Studies 1–5 focused on readiness to self-sacrifice for a cause, whereas Studies 6–8 focused on self-sacrifice to save a relationship partner’s life. In Studies 1–3 and 6, we examined whether mortality salience increases readiness to self-sacrifice. In Studies 4–5 and 7–8, we examined the defensive nature and anxiety-buffering role of self-sacrifice—that is, whether providing another terror management defense reduces the readiness to self-sacrifice following mortality salience and whether thoughts about self-sacrifice mitigate death-thought accessibility. Findings indicated that self-sacrifice for a cause served a terror management function mainly among attachment-anxious participants, whereas self-sacrifice for a relationship partner served this defensive function mainly among participants scoring low on avoidant attachment. Attachment-avoidant participants reacted to mortality salience with reluctance to self-sacrifice for another person. Discussion focuses on attachment orientation as a basis for using self-sacrifice as an existential defense.