Parents and infants: determinants of attachment in a ... - Generation R

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The importance of infant attachment for child development Introduction Attachment theory is one of the most widely used and most extensively studied conceptual frameworks in the field of social and emotional development. John Bowlby, ‘founding father’ of attachment theory, defined attachment as follows “To say of a child that he […] has an attachment to someone means that he is strongly disposed to seek proximity to and contact with a specific figure and to do so in certain situations, notably when he is frightened, tired or ill.” (Bowlby, 1969/1982). Bowlby argued that the formation of an attachment relationship is evolutionary rooted and that every child will form an attachment relationship with a person he regularly interacts with. The quality of the attachment relationship, however, is traditionally thought to be a result of interactions between the infant and the attachment figure (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978; Bowlby, 1969/1982). The gold standard procedure to assess attachment quality in infancy is the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP, Ainsworth et al., 1978). This standardized laboratory procedure consists of eight 3-minute episodes that are designed to evoke mild stress in the infant to trigger attachment behavior. The infant is exposed to the unfamiliar lab environment, a female stranger trying to engage with him and finally, the caregiver leaving the room twice. Based on the child’s behavior on return of the caregiver, the infant 11
Chapter 1 can be classified as securely attached, insecure-avoidant, insecure-resistant (Ainsworth et al., 1978) or disorganized (Main & Solomon, 1990). Securely attached children readily approach the caregiver to be comforted and then return to exploration and play. Insecure-avoidant children minimize attachment behavior and avoid contact with the caregiver. Insecure-resistant children maximize their attachment behavior, anxiously clinging to the caregiver while at the same time angrily resisting contact. The breakdown of an organized attachment strategy that characterizes disorganized attachment relationships is reflected in contradictory and inexplicable behavior, such as stereotypical rocking, laying down on the floor without moving or approaching the caregiver while showing signs of avoidance or fear. The importance of early attachment relationships for the socioemotional development of children is one of the central tenets of attachment theory and has been demonstrated in numerous studies over the past thirty years. Young infants are not yet able to deal with stressful situations on their own and therefore rely on a caregiver to help them modulate their stress. It has been argued that children develop adaptive or maladaptive emotionregulation strategies within their early attachment relationships and that these strategies affect the way they will respond to future stressful situations (Carlson, 1998; Sroufe, 1996; for a review see Weinfield, Sroufe, Egeland, & Carlson, 2008). Based on previous experiences, securely attached infants are confident that their caregiver will be available in stressful situations. This confidence provides these children with an effective mechanism to cope with stress: they can approach the attachment figure for help and comfort in stressful situations. Insecure and disorganized children on the other hand lack such an effective coping strategy, which decreases the children’s ability to regulate their emotions and reactions to stress (Cassidy, 1994; Greenberg, Speltz, DeKlyen, & Jones, 2001; Guttman-Steinmetz & Crowell, 2006). Different attachment classifications reflect different strategies of dealing with stressful situations: Insecure-avoidant children have a hypoactivating regulation strategy to avoid further rejection from an already unresponsive caregiver. Insecure-resistant children have a hyperactivating strategy, to assure the attention of an inconsistently available caregiver. Disorganized children, whose regulation strategies are thought to collapse in stressful situations, are left without a reliable mechanism to regulate their emotions. It has repeatedly been shown that individual differences in attachment quality have important implications for later adjustment (see DeKlyen & Greenberg, 2008 for a review). Whereas secure attachment is related to social competence and resilience (e.g. Belsky & Fearon, 2002; Edwards, Das Eiden, & Leonard, 2006; NICHD ECCRN, 2006), insecure and especially 12
Page 1 and 2: Parents and Infants: Determinants o
Page 3 and 4: Parents and Infants: Determinants o
Page 5 and 6: There are two lasting bequests we c
Page 10 and 11: Introduction disorganized attachmen
Page 12 and 13: Introduction (for a review see Jans
Page 14 and 15: Introduction The Generation R study
Page 16 and 17: Introduction 19
Page 18 and 19: Chapter 5 ABSTRACT Both attachment
Page 20 and 21: Chapter 5 predict differences in in
Page 22 and 23: Chapter 5 Results for both insecure
Page 24 and 25: Chapter 5 Study Population In the c
Page 26 and 27: Chapter 5 Psychology, Professor Dr.
Page 28 and 29: Chapter 5 Table 1. Child and parent
Page 30 and 31: Chapter 5 Figure 1. Insecure-resist
Page 32 and 33: Chapter 5 Discussion In a large coh
Page 34 and 35: Chapter 5 frightening parenting, th
Page 37 and 38: 6Subcortical structures and the neu
Page 39 and 40: Introduction Subcortical structures
Page 41 and 42: Subcortical structures and the neur
Page 58 and 59:
Discussion Discussion In the curren
Page 60 and 61:
Discussion a secure attachment rela
Page 62 and 63:
Discussion (Ainsworth et al., 1978)
Page 64 and 65:
Discussion less serious ones, may h
Page 66 and 67:
Limitations Discussion The studies
Page 68 and 69:
Discussion involving active interac
Page 70 and 71:
Discussion might still affect child
Page 72 and 73:
Appendices References 183
Page 74 and 75:
tivity and attachment interventions
Page 76 and 77:
Byles, J., Byrne, C., Boyle, M.H. &
Page 78 and 79:
DeKlyen, M., & Greenberg, M.T. (200
Page 80 and 81:
analysis and dynamic modeling of de
Page 82 and 83:
Hazen, N.L., McFarland, L., Jacobvi
Page 84 and 85:
dian cortisol activity, and behavio
Page 86 and 87:
unipolar mood disorders. Annual Rev
Page 88 and 89:
Pruessner, J.C., Kirschbaum, C., Me
Page 90 and 91:
T Tabachnik, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (
Page 92:
Weinfield, N.S., Sroufe, L.A., Egel
Page 96 and 97:
Summary Summary The formation of an
Page 98 and 99:
Summary index of the basic function
Page 100:
Summary These findings apply simila
Page 104 and 105:
Samenvatting Nederlandse samenvatti
Page 106 and 107:
Nederlandse samenvatting spiegel bl
Page 108 and 109:
Nederlandse samenvatting reacties t
Page 110:
Conclusie Nederlandse samenvatting
Page 114 and 115:
About the author About the author A
Page 116 and 117:
2. Teaching activities year Practic
Page 118:
Luijk, P.C.M., Saridjan, N., Tharne
show all

Parents and infants: determinants of attachment in a ... - Generation R

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?