Predicting secure infant attachment

1
Predicting secure infant attachment

• Daniel Messinger, Ph.D.

2
Review

• In the presence of a consistent caregiver almost
  all infants form an attachment
• Weve reviewed the classification of infant
  security of attachment in the strange situation.
• But what predicts a secure versus an insecure
  attachment?

3
Predicting attachment security

• What different roles might infant temperament
  have in predicting security of attachment?  What
  is the experimental evidence that caregiver
  sensitivity factors predicts secure
  attachment? What is the meta-analytic evidence
  that caregiver sensitivity factors predicts
  secure attachment? 

4
Big picture

• What produces secure attachment?
• Infant Temperament
• Caregiver Sensitivity
• Social situation divorce, daycare, social
  support
• May affect infant directly
• Situation - infant
• Or affect infant indirectly
• Situation caregiver sensitivity - infant

5
A transactional/contextual model of security of
attachment.

• Social support best predictor of secure
  attachment
• it was most important for mothers with irritable
  babies.
• Maternal unresponsiveness was associated with
  resistance during reunion episodes
• a mechanism thru which anxious attachment
  develops.
• Social support may mitigate the effects of
  unresponsive mothering by providing the infant
  with a responsive substitute.
• Crockenberg, S. B. Child Development. 1981 52,
  857-865

6
Characteristics of parents of securely attached
infants

• More spousal support
• Direct effects of parental conflict on
  insecurity?
• More social support generally
• More positive (agreeableness) and fewer negative
  psychological traits (aggressiveness and anxiety)

7
Boys and fathers

• Boys from dual-earner families?
• more insecure attachments with fathers not
  mothers.
• Fathers of sons in dual-earner households were
  less sensitive at 4 months
• reported less affection in their marriages
• Braungart Rieker, J., S. Courtney, et al. (1999).
  "Mother- and father-infant attachment Families
  in context." Journal of Family Psychology 13(4)
  535-553

8
Infant Attachment and Maternal Depression

• Mixed evidence
• Some studies show effects, others do not
• Chronicity of depression may be key
• More consistent influence on day-to-day
  interaction
• Sample study
• Attachment insecurity significantly associated
  with maternal depression among infants and
  preschoolers.
• Disorganized attachment especially common among
  mothers with more chronic depression.
• Teti, Gelfand, Messinger, Isabella (1995).
  Maternal depression and the quality of early
  attachment An examination of infants,
  preschoolers, and their mothers. Developmental
  Psychology, 31(3), 364-376

9
Orthodox View

• Caregiver (Mother) Driven System
• Sensitive caregiving yields secure attachment
• Caregiver can adapt to any child temperament
• Whos has responsibility according to this
  systerm?

10
What is sensitivity?

• Responsive
• Understands and accepts the childs individual
  proclivities
• Orchestrates harmonious interactions
• especially involving the soothing of distress
• In a variety of situations
• On a relatively consistent basis
• Belsky, 1999, p. 249

11
Just the right amount

• Unresponsive caregiving ? Avoidant attachment
• Attachment behaviors are suppressed
  (extinguished)
• Sensitive caregiving ? Secure attachment
• Attachment behaviors responded to appropriately
• Inconsistent/intrusive caregiving ? Resistant
  attachment
• Attachment behaviors only work when they are
  strong and insistent (intermittent reinforcement)
• But little empirical evidence distinguishing
  parent behaviors distinguishing A C

12
Mother or child?

• Meta-analysis of 34 clinical studies indicates
  that maternal problems such as mental illness
  lead to more deviating attachment classification
  distributions than child problems such as
  deafness.
• In clinical samples, the mother appears to play a
  more important role than the child in shaping the
  quality of the infant-mother attachment
  relationship
• Van IJzendoorn, Goldberg, Kroonenberg, Frenkel
  (1992).

13
Temperament Care giving

• Child characteristics and care giving
• Continuously and reciprocally impact each other
  in day-to-day interaction and development.
• Little information on the process through which
  this occurs
• Seifer et al.
• But lots of information on strength of respective
  caregiver and child influences

14
Effects of child care on infant-mother attachment
security

• Significant effects of maternal sensitivity and
  responsiveness.
• No significant effects of child-care experience
  (amount, age entry, or type of care) on
  attachment security or avoidance.
• Interaction more insecure when low maternal
  sensitivity/responsiveness combined with poor
  quality child care, more than minimal child care,
  or more than one care arrangement
• 1,153 infants
• NICHD study of early child care. Child
  Development. 1997. 68(5) 860-879

15
Same at 36 months

• No child-care factors (quantity, quality, or
  type) predicted attachment security
• Maternal sensitivity was strongest predictor of
  preschool attachment classification.
• Interaction Low maternal sensitivity more
  hours per week in care somewhat increased the
  risk of insecure (C).
• Significant but modest stability of attachment
  classifications from 15 to 36 months
• especially for children with A and C
  classifications.

16
Where does security lie?

• In the infant or in the caregiver-infant dyad?
• A meta-analysis of infant-father attachment shows
  weak but significant association between security
  of attachment to mother and father.
• Does this suggest a role for temperament?

17
Two Temperamental Pathways

• Indirect effect
• Temperament ? Caregiver-Infant interaction ?
  Attachment security
• Direct effect (Not empirically supported)
• Temperament ? Strange Situation Behavior ?
  Attachment Security
• Less prone to distress ? Avoidant
• More prone to distress ? Resistant

18
(No Transcript)
19
Genetic and Caregiving-Based Contributions to
Infant Attachment

• Two contrasting explanations of differences in
  attachment
• Quality of infant-caregiver relationship
• Reflection of infants temperament
• Emphasis on emotional reactivity vs. emotion
  regulation
• Proposed reconciliation distress reactivity
  during SSP shaped by predispositions for negative
  emotionality

20
Empirical resolution
Belsky Sussman-Stillman several replications
21
5-HTTLPR

• Serotonin transporter linked polymorphic region
• Short (S) vs. Long (L) alleles
• S allele associated with
• diminished transcription
• reduced serotonin uptake
• heightened amygdala activity

22
Objective and Hypothesis

• Determine unique contributions of caregiver
  quality and genetic variation (5HTTPLR) on infant
  attachment at 12 and 18 months
• Caregiver quality will predict secure vs insecure
• More responsive mothers lead to secure infants
• 5HTTPLR variation will predict reactivity across
  security
• S and LG alleles will be more reactive than LA

23
Methods

• 155 infants and mothers
• Measures of
• Maternal responsiveness at 6 months
• Attachment at 12 and 18 months
• Emotional distress in SSP (Belskys grouping)
• 5-HTTLPR variation

24
Predicting Security and Distress Reactivity
25
Genetic and Caregiving-Based Contributions to
Infant Attachment

• Maternal responsiveness predicted attachment
• 5-HTTLPR predicted distress during SSP
• No prediction to attachment security, but
  subtypes
• Genetic variation and caregiving context make
  unique contributions to differences in attachment
  behavior
• Caregiving ? secure vs. insecure
• 5-HTTLPR ? how this is manifested

26
Discussion

• Strengths and weaknesses?
• How would you expect disorganized infants to be
  influenced by maternal sensitivity and/or genetic
  variation?

27
Disorganized attachment predicted by parent
behavior

• Strongly related to parental maltreatment,
  moderately related to sensitivity
• Unrelated to difficult infant temperament
• 2 studies have linked frightening parental
  behavior to disorganized attachment
• Though not significantly related to depression
• van IJzendoorn, M. H., Schuengel, C., Bakermans
  Kranenburg, M. J. (1999). Disorganized attachment
  in early childhood Meta-analysis of precursors,
  concomitants, and sequelae. Development and
  Psychopathology, 11(2), 225-249.

28
More evidence for care-giving effects

• Experimental
• Observational
• Meta-analysis of quasi-experiments

29
Experiment 1 Sensitivity training

• 100 irritable, low-SES Dutch infants
• 50 mothers in experimental group
• receive 3 home visits to foster contingent,
  consistent, and appropriate responses to and -
  infant signals
• 50 control mothers are observed only

30
Results

• Experimental infants 36/50 (72) secure
• Control infants 16/50 (32) secure
• Sensitivity training for mother decreases rates
  of insecurity among irritable infants
• Meta-analysis of intervention studies showed a
  moderately large effect size, d .48
• Van den Boom

31
Experiment 2 Replicate the Snuggly Effect!

• 49 low-socioeconomic status (SES) mothers of
  newborn infants
• Given soft baby carriers (more physical contact)
  or infant seats (less contact).
• More experimental (83) than control infants
  (38) were securely attached at 13 mo.
• 3.5 mo, mothers in the experimental group were
  more contingently responsive than control mothers
  to their infants' vocalizations.
• Low cost experimentally-validated intervention?
• Anisfeld, Casper, Nozyce, Cunningham (1990).
  Does infant carrying promote attachment? An
  experimental study of the effects of increased
  physical contact on the development of
  attachment. Child Development, 61(5), 1617-1627.

32
Conclusions

• Sensitivity is important
• Temperament may also be a factor
• Does sensitive interaction make a difference in
  naturalistic settings
• Many studies have been done
• using many measures of interaction
• Meta-analysis can help sort them out

33
Debate

• Sensitive-responsiveness predicts secure
  attachment
• vs.
• Relevant maternal behaviors are unclear and
  predictive association is much weaker than
  originally believed

34
Whats a meta-analysis?

• Study of studies
• quantitative review of the literature
• more objective
• Each subject in the meta-analysis is a study
• or effect size comparison
• Do they show a significant effect?
• Whats the size of the effect?
• Selection of studies is crucial
• like selection of participants

35
Pros Cons

• Quantitative, more objective
• Each study is a sample of a population
• Studies are combined to determine the size and
  significance of the effect
• Useful for addressing contentious issues

• Dissimilar studies combined
• Mixing apples and oranges
• Close attention to substance of studies is
  necessary

36
Methods

• Select studies rating maternal interaction/sensiti
  vity and security of infant attachment
• Some clinical populations
• Some simultaneous maternal behavior and infant
  attachment

37
Expressing results

• r for predicting security vs. insecurity
• is roughly to difference in proportion of
  secure infants
• r to d produces standard effect size

38
Overall (No Grouping)

• All caregiving comparisons
• 7,223 infants in 123 comparisons
• 17 greater likelihood of security
• r .17
• Random sample with no overlapping comparisons
• 4,176 infants in 66 comparisons/studies
• 19 greater likelihood of security (r .19)

39
Debate Topic

• Importance of sensitivity as a predictor
• Cross-cultural validity
• Specificity
• Playful interactions?
• Close physical contact?

40
Grouping similar studies

• 55 maternal interaction constructs
• Ranging from Ainsworth scales to questionnaire
  assessments of positive attitude toward child
• Sensitivity, Contiguity of response, Physical
  Contact, and Cooperation
• 15 (of 55) constructs grouped a priori into four
  groups, 93 agreement

41
Sensitivity Studies Only

• Perceive signals accurately and respond promptly
  and appropriately
• 22 (r .22), 7,223 infants in 123 comparisons
• Original Ainsworth subscale
• 24 (r .24), 837 infants in subset of 16
  studies
• Socioeconomic class is a moderator
• Middle (r .27) lower (r .15)

42
Contiguity of response Responsiveness

• Promptness or frequency without a qualitative
  assessment of mothers behavior
• 10 (r .10), 825 infants in 14 studies
• Quality and quantity of physical contact
• 9 (r .09), 637 infants in 9 studies
• Cooperation - Absence of intrusive behavior
• 13 (r .13), 493 infants in 9 studies

43
Additional studies

• Associations in more optimal group of studies
• Synchrony, Mutuality, Support
• 1,928 infants in 28 studies, r .19
• are not stronger than in less optimal group
• Positive attitude Stimulation
• 1,233 infants in 24 studies, r .19

44
Conclusions

• Sensitivity and quality of interaction are
  important and consistent (but not exclusive)
  predictors of attachment security.
• Sensitivity important but not only factor
• Orthodox hypothesis supported weakly

45

• Can infant attention studies shed light on
  caregiving (or temperamental) roots of attachment
  security?

46
What infant expects
Evidence for Infants Internal Working Models of
Attachment. 2007. Susan C. Johnson, Carol S.
Dweck, and Frances S. Chen
47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
7 month old infants grouped by attachment security
50
7 month fear bias score and disorganization
51
(No Transcript)
52
However, interactions with genes reported by
Barry et al. 2008
53
Autism challenges attachment theory

• 55 toddlers with autism spectrum disorder (ASD),
  mental retardation, language delay, and typical
  development.
• diagnosed at 4 years. Two years before,
  attachment, sensitivity assessed
• Parents of children with ASD y sensitive as
  other parents
• But children show more disorganization, less
  involvement.
• More sensitive parents had more secure children,
• but only in group without ASD.
• Less severe autistic symptoms in the social
  domain predicted more attachment security..
• van Ijzendoorn, M. H., Rutgers, A. H.,
  Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., van Daalen, E.,
  Dietz, C., Buitelaar, J. K., et al. (2007).
  Parental sensitivity and attachment in children
  with autism spectrum disorder Comparison with
  children with mental retardation, with language
  delays, and with typical development. Child
  Development, 78, 597-608.

54
Autism challenges attachment theory
55
Resistant attachment among children with emerging
ASD
56
Subtle attachment differencesMore distance
securitySee new results
Haltigan et al., 2010
57
Basis study

• 4-mo parent infant factors associated with
  infant-mother but not infant-father attachment.
• As and B1-B2s showed more affect regulation
  toward mothers and fathers
• Mothers of both secure groups were more sensitive
  than mothers of Cs.
• Braungart-Rieker, J. M., M. M. Garwood, et al.
  (2001). "Parental sensitivity, infant affect, and
  affect regulation Predictors of later
  attachment." Child Dev.

58
Sensitivity

• Sensitive caregiving promotes attachment.
• But effects are not universally found
• Seifer et al., 1996
• Sensitive caregiving is underspecified
• What does sensitivity look like cross-culturally
  and in different subcultures?

59
FFSF Mid-range models

• In pilot analyses based on continuous ratings of
  affect, for example, mid-range levels of mother
  responsiveness (infant-to-mother interactive
  influence) were associated with 15-month
  attachment security, the highest levels were
  associated with resistance, and the lowest levels
  with avoidance and disorganized attachment
  classifications, F(3,23) 3.55, p .03,
  estimated ?2 .24.
• Builds on Beebe et al.
• But where is the evidence that early measured
  interaction predicts attachment?

60
Attachment social play

• What does sensitivity look like in different
  caregiving domains such as playmate and
  attachment figure?
• Attachment theory is not clear as to whether the
  concepts are distinguishable and what type of
  association is to be expected.

61
Variability within the family

• Caregivers occupy many roles vis-à-vis the child
  playmate, discipliner, as well as attachment
  figures
• What does sensitive caregiving look like in
  different domains as parents occupy these
  different roles?
• Meta-analysis of link between sensitive fathering
  and attachment showed weak but significant
  association (d .13).

62
The Paradox of Sensitivity

• Strongly predictive of many outcomes
• But somewhat subjective in content
• What about the FFSF?

63
Cross-cultural evidence

• Among dyads living in subsistence societies
  secure attachment exists in relationships in
  which social play between caregiver and child was
  not observed and was seen as frivolous.
• Gusii, Ganda, etc.
• Secure attachment without play
• The anthropological veto

Babies Movie
64
Middle-class American dyads

• Marginal prediction from early quality of social
  play to later security of attachment (Ainsworth
  et al., Kiser)
• Moderate associations between concurrent social
  play and attachment
• Roggmans secure dyads showed more
  infant-initiated toy exchanges maternal
  positive vocalizations
• co-orientation of attention to toys (males only)
• Rosenbergs secure dyads spend more time
  reciprocally interacting

65
Low SES American mother-infant dyads

• Egeland shows weak antecedent association
• Multivariate but only 3 of 12 univariate
• E.g., only satisfaction in play
• Gaensbauer shows no significant association in
• infant social use of objects
• mother response to infant bids
• infant positive affect
• (n 107)
• MLS Study

66
Meta-analytic results

• De Wolff and van Ijzendoorn also found that
  Ainsworth-based measures of sensitivity were
  stronger predictors of attachment security in
  middle-class r .27) than lower-class dyads (r
  .15).

67
Variability

• Characterizes the association between security of
  attachment and quality of social play
  cross-culturally

68
Attachment as organizer

• Attachment is pre-eminent "affective bond" that
  organizes interaction between infant and
  caregiver (organizational construct perspective)
• If attachment is secure,
• Positive play should be possible or
• play should be positive

69
Limited relations between attachment security
and quality of social interaction.
70
Synthesis?
71
In a teaching situation, student non-experts rate
teaching even if you ask them to rate
supportiveness

• Sensitive structuring (the degree to which the
  parent is involved in providing appropriate
  structure and teaching for the child),
• ICC .75, and concordance with expert ratings,
  r .71
• But emotional supportiveness (the degree to
  which the parent is warm, positive, responsive
  and supportive to her child, while also
  respecting the childs independence).
• ICC .47, r .36, ns.
• In fact, non-expert emotional supportiveness
  ratings exhibited high associations with the
  structuring ratings of experts,
• r .78, p lt .001, and non-experts, r .70, p lt
  .01.

72
Sensitivity in the SS

• Lower levels of maternal sensitivity (Behrens,
  Parker, Haltigan, 2011 Leerkes, Parade,
  Gudmundson, 2011 Smith Pederson, 1988) and
  more frequent maternal displays of atypical
  behaviors (e.g., lower responsivity,
  inappropriate responses to child affect,
  disrupted communication Goldberg, Benoit,
  Blokland, Madigan, 2003 Goldberg,
  MacKay-Soroka, Rochester, 1994 Lyons-Ruth,
  Bronfman, Parsons, 1999) have been documented
  most often amongst insecurely attached children
  and children with disorganized attachment when
  maternal behavior and child attachment were
  assessed concurrently in the SSP

73
References

• Interactional and contextual determinants of
  attachment security (Belsky, 1999)
• The Nature of the Childs Ties (Cassidy, 1999)
• Sensitivity and attachment A meta-analysis on
  parental antecedents of infant attachment (De
  Wolff van IJzendoorn, 1997)
• Van IJzendoorn, Goldberg, Kroonenberg, Frenkel
  (1992). The relative effects of maternal and
  child problems on the quality of attachment - a
  meta-analysis of attachment in clinical-samples.
  Child Development, 63, 840-858.
• Van IJzendoorn, Kroonenberg (1988).
  Cross-cultural patterns of attachment A
  meta-analysis of the strange situation. Child
  Development, 59, 147-156.1) van den Boom DC. Do
  first-year intervention effects endure? Follow-up
  during toddlerhood of a sample of Dutch irritable
  infants. Child Development 199566(6)1798-1816.
• 2) van den Boom DC. The influence of temperament
  and mothering on attachment and exploration an
  experimental manipulation of sensitive
  responsiveness among lower-class mothers with
  irritable infants Child Development
  199465(5)1457-77. 65(6)