Factor structure of the Friends and Family interview

Abstract

2020). Factor structure of the Friends and Family interview. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 61, 460-469.The aim of this study was to specify the latent construct structure of the Friends and Family Interview (FFI: Steele & Steele, 2005) based on its dimensional scale coding protocol. The FFI is a semi-structured interview measuring attachment in middle childhood. We analyzed data from 341 FFI interviews with children aged 7-12 years, recruited in the Scandinavian € Oresund Region. Exploratory Factor Analysis revealed a three-component model as best fitting the data. The first component, denoting attachment security, gathered all dimensional scales for evidence of secure base/safe haven regarding mother/father and coherence in the child's narrative style, along with scales regarding reflective functioning, self-perception, and social functioning. The second component comprised preoccupying feelings of anger, but also derogation. The third component gathered all scales coding idealization. Interrelations among the components were consistent with attachment theory, and respondents' scores for all three components differed significantly across the four categorical attachment classifications. Affect regulation of negative emotion through anger and through derogation co-occurred, and was distinct from regulation through maintaining a belief that things are better than they appear (idealization). These two affect regulation strategies appeared commonly when reflective functioning, and an organized self-perception, and positive peer relations were less in evidence. The multi-dimensional FFI coding system appears to measure successfully these diverse features of the child's narrative provided in response to the interview. Overall, our findings support the construct validity of the FFI and provide further evidence of its usefulness for assessing attachment in middle childhood and early adolescence.Notes: CO = Coherence; ToM = Theory of Mind; DP = Developmental Perspective; DoF = Diversity of Feeling; Social comp = Social competence; School comp = school competence; Friend frequ = Frequency of contact/interaction with best friend; Friend quality = Quality of relationship with best friend; RR = Role Reversal; AR = Adaptive Response; DPR = Differentiation of Parental Representations; co = competence; mo = mother; fa = father.

What's Happened to Italian Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Preliminary Study on Symptoms, Problematic Social Media Usage, and Attachment: Relationships and Differences With Pre-pandemic Peers

“…The FFI shows good psychometric proprieties (56,(62)(63)(64)(65)). Cronbach's α for the reliability was 0.74 in this study.…”

Secure Attachment Representation in Adolescence Buffers Heart-Rate Reactivity in Response to Attachment-Related Stressors

“…For example, the Family and Friends Interview (FFI, Steele and Steele, 2005 ) is theoretically based on the AAI but was adapted to the developmental abilities of children and adolescents between 8 and 16 years. The FFI differs from the AAI by considering a child’s reality and experiences in the context of friendships, siblings, self-perception and reflective functioning dimensions ( Pace, 2014 ; Pace et al, 2020 ; Psouni et al, 2020 ). As the FFI inquiries about the adolescents’ view of the conflicting emotions arising in their close relationships rather than comparing semantic and episodic memories of past experiences with attachment figures like in the AAI ( Pace, 2014 ), this technique might cause a higher emotional intensity and thus reveal different physiological patterns in those with a resolved and an unsolved attachment status.…”

A Systematic Review of Representational and Behavioral Measures of Parent-Child Attachment Available for Middle Childhood

“…DOI: 10.1159/000521393 Discriminant Validity. Steele & Steele (2005) reported that older children were scored higher on narrative coherence, although other studies reported that attachment indices were not significantly related to age Groza et al, 2012;Kerns et al, 2015;Obeldobel & Kerns, 2020;Pace et al, 2015;Psouni & Apetroaia, 2014;Psouni et al, 2020). Regarding gender, Barcons et al (2012) found that girls were scored higher on security, while other studies reported nonsignificant associations between FFI attachment indices and gender Kerns et al, 2015;Obeldobel & Kerns, 2020;Pace et al, 2015;Psouni & Apetroaia, 2014;Psouni et al, 2020;Steele & Steele, 2005).…”

“…Steele & Steele (2005) reported that older children were scored higher on narrative coherence, although other studies reported that attachment indices were not significantly related to age Groza et al, 2012;Kerns et al, 2015;Obeldobel & Kerns, 2020;Pace et al, 2015;Psouni & Apetroaia, 2014;Psouni et al, 2020). Regarding gender, Barcons et al (2012) found that girls were scored higher on security, while other studies reported nonsignificant associations between FFI attachment indices and gender Kerns et al, 2015;Obeldobel & Kerns, 2020;Pace et al, 2015;Psouni & Apetroaia, 2014;Psouni et al, 2020;Steele & Steele, 2005). Regarding verbal intelligence, Obeldobel and Kerns (2020) found that maternal secure base availability was associated with higher verbal intelligence and had nonsignificant associations with other attachment indices they assessed (narrative coherence, maternal safe haven availability, paternal safe haven and secure base availability), and Steele & Steele (2005) did not find significant associations with attachment indices and verbal intelligence.…”