Attachment in the Early Life Course: Meta-Analytic Evidence for Its Role in Socioemotional Development

After decades of research on early attachment relationships, questions remain concerning whether the evidence supports claims made by attachment theory, in particular, that variation in early attachment predicts children’s developmental adaptation or maladaptation, and that characteristics of children’s temperament does not determine attachment. To evaluate these claims, we conducted meta-analyses on early attachment and children’s social competence with peers, externalizing problems, internalizing symptoms, and temperament. In this article, we summarize our findings, which support attachment theory—though we note caveats. We also call for new measurement models, a focus on mediating and moderating mechanisms, and multisite replications

Attachment and Developmental Psychopathology

This chapter examines the conceptual and empirical contributions of attachment theory to the field of developmental psychopathology. It reviews the major elements and methods of attachment theory and research, and considers current evidence regarding a) the environmental and genetic determinants of attachment, b) short-and long-term continuity in attachment processes, c) the association between attachment and emerging psychopathology, d) candidate mediating mechanisms conveying risk, and d) the efficacy of attachment-focused interventions. We end with a consideration of the broader relevance of attachment theory for understanding the process and mechanisms of change in psychological therapies. We conclude that attachment represents a coherent and generally well-supported developmental construct, which is of great potential value as a framework for prevention and intervention. We also highlight several key outstanding issues and qualifications regarding the measurement of attachment, the scope and limits of its effects on children’s outcomes, and unresolved scientific issues regarding causal mechanisms

Narrowing the Transmission Gap: A Synthesis of Three Decades of Research on Intergenerational Transmission of Attachment

wenty years ago, meta-analytic results (k = 19) confirmed the association between caregiver attachment representations and child–caregiver attachment (Van IJzendoorn, 1995). A test of caregiver sensitivity as the mechanism behind this intergenerational transmission showed an intriguing “transmission gap.” Since then, the intergenerational transmission of attachment and the transmission gap have been studied extensively, and now extend to diverse populations from all over the globe. Two decades later, the current review revisited the effect sizes of intergenerational transmission, the heterogeneity of the transmission effects, and the size of the transmission gap. Analyses were carried out with a total of 95 samples (total N = 4,819). All analyses confirmed intergenerational transmission of attachment, with larger effect sizes for secure-autonomous transmission (r = .31) than for unresolved transmission (r = .21), albeit with significantly smaller effect sizes than 2 decades earlier (r = .47 and r = .31, respectively). Effect sizes were moderated by risk status of the sample, biological relatedness of child–caregiver dyads, and age of the children. Multivariate moderator analyses showed that unpublished and more recent studies had smaller effect sizes than published and older studies. Path analyses showed that the transmission could not be fully explained by caregiver sensitivity, with more recent studies narrowing but not bridging the “transmission gap.” Implications for attachment theory as well as future directions for research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved)

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

The latent structure of the adult attachment interview: Large sample evidence from the collaboration on attachment transmission synthesis

The Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) is a widely used measure in developmental science that assesses adults’ current states of mind regarding early attachment-related experiences with their primary caregivers. The standard system for coding the AAI recommends classifying individuals categorically as having an autonomous, dismissing, preoccupied, or unresolved attachment state of mind. However, previous factor and taxometric analyses suggest that: (a) adults’ attachment states of mind are captured by two weakly correlated factors reflecting adults’ dismissing and preoccupied states of mind and (b) individual differences on these factors are continuously rather than categorically distributed. The current study revisited these suggestions about the latent structure of AAI scales by leveraging individual participant data from 40 studies (N = 3,218), with a particular focus on the controversial observation from prior factor analytic work that indicators of preoccupied states of mind and indicators of unresolved states of mind about loss and trauma loaded on a common factor. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that: (a) a 2-factor model with weakly correlated dismissing and preoccupied factors and (b) a 3-factor model that further distinguished unresolved from preoccupied states of mind were both compatible with the data. The preoccupied and unresolved factors in the 3-factor model were highly correlated. Taxometric analyses suggested that individual differences in dismissing, preoccupied, and unresolved states of mind were more consistent with a continuous than a categorical model. The importance of additional tests of predictive validity of the various models is emphasized

Differential Genetic Susceptibility to Child Risk at Birth in Predicting Observed Maternal Behavior

This study examined parenting as a function of child medical risks at birth and parental genotype (dopamine D4 receptor; DRD4). Our hypothesis was that the relation between child risks and later maternal sensitivity would depend on the presence/absence of a genetic variant in the mothers, thus revealing a gene by environment interaction (GXE). Risk at birth was defined by combining risk indices of children's gestational age at birth, birth weight, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. The DRD4-III 7-repeat allele was chosen as a relevant genotype as it was recently shown to moderate the effect of environmental stress on parental sensitivity. Mothers of 104 twin pairs provided DNA samples and were observed with their children in a laboratory play session when the children were 3.5 years old. Results indicate that higher levels of risk at birth were associated with less sensitive parenting only among mothers carrying the 7-repeat allele, but not among mothers carrying shorter alleles. Moreover, mothers who are carriers of the 7-repeat allele and whose children scored low on the risk index were observed to have the highest levels of sensitivity. These findings provide evidence for the interactive effects of genes and environment (in this study, children born at higher risk) on parenting, and are consistent with a genetic differential susceptibility model of parenting by demonstrating that some parents are inherently more susceptible to environmental influences, both good and bad, than are others