Attachment in the early life course: Meta-analytic evidence for its role in socioemotional development

Development Psychopathology in context: famil

Attachment and temperament in the early life course: A meta-analytic review.

This meta‐analytic review examines the association between early attachment (assessed at 1–5 years) and child temperament (assessed at birth–12 years), and compares the strength of this association with recently documented meta‐analytic associations between early attachment and social competence, externalizing behavior, and internalizing symptoms. Based on 109 independent samples (N = 11,440) of diverse socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds, temperament was weakly associated with attachment (in)security (d = .14, CI [0.08, 0.19]) but modestly associated with resistant attachment (d = .30, CI [0.21, 0.40]). Temperament was not significantly associated with avoidant (d = .10, CI [−0.02, 0.19]) or disorganized (d = .11, CI [−0.03, 0.25]) attachment. Across developmental domains, early attachment security was more strongly associated with social competence and externalizing behaviors than internalizing symptoms and temperament.Development Psychopathology in context: famil

The Collaboration on Attachment Transmission Synthesis (CATS): A Move to the Level of Individual-Participant-Data Meta-Analysis

Generations of researchers have tested and used attachment theory to understand children’s development. To bring coherence to the expansive set of findings from small-sample studies, the field early on adopted meta-analysis. Nevertheless, gaps in understanding intergenerational transmission of individual differences in attachment continue to exist. We discuss how attachment research has been addressing these challenges by collaborating in formulating questions and pooling data and resources for individual-participant-data meta-analyses. The collaborative model means that sharing hard-won and valuable data goes hand in hand with directly and intensively interacting with a large community of researchers in the initiation phase of research, deliberating on and critically reviewing new hypotheses, and providing access to a large, carefully curated pool of data for testing these hypotheses. Challenges in pooling data are also discussed

Configurations of mother-child and father-child attachment as predictors of internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems: An individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis

An unsettled question in attachment theory and research is the extent to which children's attachment patterns with mothers and fathers jointly predict developmental outcomes. In this study, we used individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to assess whether early attachment networks with mothers and fathers are associated with children's internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems. Following a pre-registered protocol, data from 9 studies and 1,097 children (mean age: 28.67 months) with attachment classifications to both mothers and fathers were included in analyses. We used a linear mixed effects analysis to assess differences in children's internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems as assessed via the average of both maternal and paternal reports based on whether children had two, one, or no insecure (or disorganized) attachments. Results indicated that children with an insecure attachment relationship with one or both parents were at higher risk for elevated internalizing behavioral problems compared with children who were securely attached to both parents. Children whose attachment relationships with both parents were classified as disorganized had more externalizing behavioral problems compared to children with either one or no disorganized attachment relationship with their parents. Across attachment classification networks and behavioral problems, findings suggest (a) an increased vulnerability to behavioral problems when children have insecure or disorganized attachment to both parents, and (b) that mother-child and father-child attachment relationships may not differ in the roles they play in children's development of internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems

Shared and non-shared influences on the development of attachment in twins

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DXN034060 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Lost in translation? Het belang van meer duidelijkheid bij het gebruik van kernbegrippen uit de gehechtheidstheorie in wetenschap en praktijk

De gehechtheidstheorie heeft een grote invloed gehad op de manier waarop er zowel in de wetenschap als in de praktijk gedacht wordt over de sociale en emotionele ontwikkeling van kinderen. Kernbegrippen die te maken hebben met gehechtheid, zoals “veiligheid”, “sensitiviteit” of “desorganisatie” zijn herkenbaar voor veel mensen. Binnen het gehechtheidsonderzoek wordt echter geen van deze begrippen op dezelfde manier gebruikt als in het dagelijkse taalgebruik. Dit artikel beschrijft de misverstanden die kunnen ontstaan door onduidelijkheden in de terminologie, waarbij onderzoekers uit bijv. de pedagogische wetenschappen en de sociale psychologie, en professionals uit bijv. de (ortho)pedagogiek, de klinische psychologie of de jeugdbescherming vergelijkbare begrippen gebruiken, maar hier niet dezelfde invulling of betekenis aan geven. Dit veroorzaakt misverstanden en staat een effectieve communicatie en samenwerking tussen wetenschap en praktijk in de weg.Om een betere communicatie te bevorderen, is het belangrijk om meer duidelijkheid te verschaffen over de technische betekenis van begrippen en termen die binnen het gehechtheidsonderzoek gebruikt worden. Om hier een begin mee te maken, is onlangs een Engelstalige begrippenlijst gepubliceerd op de website van de Society for Emotion and Attachment Studies (https://seasinternational.org). In deze paper introduceren wij deze begrippenlijst en de Nederlandse vertaling van deze begrippen. De begrippenlijst is bedoeld als het begin van een naslagwerk voor onderzoekers, clinici en professionals die werken met kennis over gehechtheid. De lijst is een eerste stap richting heldere definities van kernbegrippen met betrekking tot gehechtheid en meer overeenstemming over de betekenis hiervan. Het uiteindelijke doel is meer en betere uitwisseling tussen onderzoek en praktijk op het gebied van gehechtheid.ABSTRACTAttachment theory has had a strong impact on the way both researchers and clinicians think about children’s social emotional development. Part of the appeal of attachment theory is that it uses language which is readily recognizable and close to our everyday experiences. However, within academic attachment research, terms such as ‘attachment’, ‘security’, ‘sensitivity’ or ‘disorganization’ have a more technical meaning that is not in line with ordinary language.This article describes misconceptions that can occur when different communities (e.g., developmental scientists, social psychologists, clinicians working in clinical psychology, psychiatry or social workers) use similar terms to describe different phenomena, without realizing that they are talking about different things. This may interfere with an effective dialogue between different scientific and clinical communities with a stake in attachment theoretical knowledge, and prevent them from genuinely learning from one another by making use of their respective strengths, and effective collaboration.To improve communication, more clarity is needed about the technical meaning of attachment concepts as used in attachment research. As a first step towards this, a guide has recently been published on the website of the Society for Emotion and Attachment Studies (https://seasinternationl.org) including key terms from attachment theory, common misconceptions, and a brief description of how attachment researchers currently understand these concepts based on recent evidence base. In this article, we introduce the Dutch translation of this guide. The guide is meant for researchers, clinicians, and professionals working with attachment knowledge. The aim is to increase clarity and to reach more consensus about the technical meaning of important attachment terminology to support the dialogue between researchers and clinicians from different fields as well as other audiences

Testing the cycle of maltreatment hypothesis: Meta-analytic evidence of the intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment

It has long been claimed that "maltreatment begets maltreatment," that is, a parent's history of maltreatment increases the risk that his or her child will also suffer maltreatment. However, significant methodological concerns have been raised regarding evidence supporting this assertion, with some arguing that the association weakens in samples with higher methodological rigor. In the current study, the intergenerational transmission of maltreatment hypothesis is examined in 142 studies (149 samples; 227,918 dyads) that underwent a methodological quality review, as well as data extraction on a number of potential moderator variables. Results reveal a modest association of intergenerational maltreatment (k = 80; d = 0.45, 95% confidence interval; CI [0.37, 0.54]). Support for the intergenerational transmission of specific maltreatment types was also observed (neglect: k = 13, d = 0.24, 95% CI [0.11, 0.37]; physical abuse: k = 61, d = 0.41, 95% CI [0.33, 0.49]; emotional abuse: k = 18, d = 0.57, 95% CI [0.43, 0.71]; sexual abuse: k = 18, d = 0.39, 95% CI [0.24, 0.55]). Methodological quality only emerged as a significant moderator of the intergenerational transmission of physical abuse, with a weakening of effect sizes as methodological rigor increased. Evidence from this meta-analysis confirms the cycle of maltreatment hypothesis, although effect sizes were modest. Future research should focus on deepening understanding of mechanisms of transmission, as well as identifying protective factors that can effectively break the cycle of maltreatment.Development Psychopathology in context: famil