Failing the Duck test: Reply to Barbaro, Boutwell, Barnes, and Shackelford (2017)

In this reply, we respond to the critique by Barbaro, Boutwell, Barnes, and Shackelford (2017) in regard to our recent meta-analysis of intergenerational transmission of attachment (Verhage et al., 2016). Barbaro et al. (2017) claim that the influence of shared environment on attachment decreases with age, whereas unique environmental and genetic influences increase, which they felt was disregarded in our meta-analysis. Their criticisms, we argue, are based on a misunderstanding of the core tenets of attachment theory. Barbaro et al. (2017) unify parent-offspring attachment, attachment representations, and romantic-pair attachment under the same conceptual and empirical umbrella, even though these constructs serve different behavioral systems. We show that excluding the incompatible twin data on pair bonding from their analysis undercuts their argument. Statements about the role of the shared environment in attachment beyond early childhood are highly uncertain at this point. Importantly, even if the role of the shared environment were to wane with age, its effects may still be causally important in later childhood or adult outcomes, as either an indirect factor or as a factor influencing earlier developmental outcomes

Exploring attachment to the "homeland" and its association with heritage culture identification

Conceptualisations of attachment to one’s nation of origin reflecting a symbolic caregiver can be found cross-culturally in literature, art, and language. Despite its prevalence, the relationship with one’s nation has not been investigated empirically in terms of an attachment theory framework. Two studies employed an attachment theory approach to investigate the construct validity of symbolic attachment to one’s nation of origin, and its association with acculturation (operationalized as heritage and mainstream culture identification). Results for Study 1 indicated a three-factor structure of nation attachment; the factors were labelled secure-preoccupied, fearful, and dismissive nation attachment. Hierarchical linear modelling was employed to control for differing cultures across participants. Secure-preoccupied nation attachment was a significant predictor of increased heritage culture identification for participants residing in their country of birth, whilst dismissive nation attachment was a significant predictor of decreased heritage culture identification for international migrants. Securepreoccupied nation attachment was also associated with higher levels of subjective-wellbeing. Study 2 further confirmed the validity of the nation attachment construct through confirmatory factor analysis; the three-factor model adequately fit the data. Similar to the results of Study 1, secure-preoccupied nation attachment was associated with increased levels of heritage culture identification and psychological well-being. Implications of the tripartite model of nation attachment for identity and well-being will be discussed

Improved risk classification for risk-specific therapy based on the molecular study of minimal residual disease (MRD) in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)

Clinical risk classification is inaccurate in predicting relapse in adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, sometimes resulting in patients receiving inappropriate chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation (SCT). We studied minimal residual disease (MRD) as a predictive factor for recurrence and as a decisional tool for postconsolidation maintenance (in MRD(neg)) or SCT (in MRD(pos)). MRD was tested at weeks 10, 16, and 22 using real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction with 1 or more sensitive probes. Only patients with t(9; 22) or t(4; 11) were immediately eligible for allogeneic SCT. Of 280 registered patients (236 in remission), 34 underwent an early SCT, 60 suffered from relapse or severe toxicity, and 142 were evaluable for MRD at the end of consolidation. Of these, 58 were MRD(neg), 54 MRD(pos), and 30 were not assessable. Five-year overall survival/disease-free survival rates were 0.75/0.72 in the MRD(neg) group compared with 0.33/0.14 in MRD(pos) (P = .001), regardless of the clinical risk class. MRD was the most significant risk factor for relapse (hazard ratio, 5.22). MRD results at weeks 16 to 22 correlated strongly with the earlier time point (P = .001) using a level of 10(-4) or higher to define persistent disease. MRD analysis during early postremission therapy improves risk definitions and bolsters risk-oriented strategies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00358072