These findings reinforce the close associations that exist among the AASR dimensions, although there are discrete differences between them, as it is consistent with previous research (Collins & Read, 1990).
This convergence is not surprising as both subscales of the AASR are correlated, implying that as people tend to feel more self-worth, secure and comfortable in social situations, and have a positive view of others and the world, they also perceive themselves as more efficient and are more self-acceptant in their relationships, having a greater subjective estimation of their individual possibility to mate, as well as better quality of romantic relationships (Collins, Ford, Guichard, & Allard, 2006).
Regarding factor analysis, we failed to find a model adjustment of the AASR through a CFA even after dropping problematic items of the depend subscale (items 2 and 5), a possibility that was suggested by the low internal consistency values on the subscale.
Due to reliability problems of the depend subscale which could partially explain the bad adjustment of the AASR in the CFA we run in Study 1, we generated a new version of the instrument with a modified translation of the word "dependence" on items 2 and 5.
Thus, in this second study we expected to improve the construct validity of the scale modifying the language of two of the items of the depend dimension, and we expected to arrive to an acceptable fit of the Chilean version of Collins' AASR (1996).
We applied general demographic questions and the modified version of the AASR.
This implies some degree of content overlapping of those items, a finding that should be considered in further studies aimed to assess model adequacy of the AASR through CFA, in a similar context.
Summing up, the results of Study 2 suggest that the Chilean version of the AASR is consistent with the three-dimensional theoretical model that is intended to assess, provided that some overlapping between items 15 and 10, and 15 and 5 is evidenced; as well as a cross-loading of item 5 on the close dimension, in addition to its original load on depend.
In the present study we sought to adapt and provide evidence of construct validity of the AASR in the Chilean context.
The construct validity of the Chilean adaptation of the AASR showed the predicted convergent relationships of the model of the self (depend as well as close) with self-esteem, mate value and quality of relationships.
Additional convergent evidence of the pertinence of the AASR to the local context comes from the confirmation of positive associations of the model of others portrayed in the anxiety dimension, with jealousy, and different aspects of aggression; while the close and depend dimensions correlated inversely with these aspects of the self.
Across the two studies we found limitations related to the need of more optimal sampling that must be considered for future research: (a) we had a very reduced size of the test-retest subsample, and some of the criterion validity samples; (b) the sample size of the second study constitutes a limitation to large sample theory behind Structural Equation Modeling, and more specifically CFA (Byrne, 2006); (c) the gender distribution of our samples was highly biased towards women, with only close to 30% of men responding to the AASR in both studies.