Four‐model approach to adolescent–parent attachment relationships and adolescents' loneliness, school belonging, and teacher appraisal

Abstract

This study tested monotropy, hierarchy, independence, and integration conceptual models of adolescent-mother and adolescent-father attachment to explain adolescents' perceived social interrelationships with extrafamilial attachment figures (peers, teachers). Participants included 356 Israeli adolescents (12-15 years). More adolescents were significantly classified as securely attached to mothers than to fathers, but high concordances emerged. Results supported two of the attachment models, hierarchy and integration, as explaining variation in adolescents' perceived extrafamilial interrelationships. As per the hierarchy attachment model, adolescent-mother attachment outweighed adolescent-father attachment to some extent in predicting adolescents' perceived social interrelationship measures. As per the integration attachment model, significant differences emerged on most social interrelationship measures between the 4 distinct subgroups: secure attachment to both parents, neither, only father, only mother. The Discussion section focuses on the unique importance of attachment to each parent for typically developing junior high students.Four conceptual models have emerged in the attachment literature illustrating possible links between children's secure attachments with mothers and fathers and those children's subsequent socioemotional developmental outcomes (see reviews in Bretherton, 2010;van IJzendoorn, Sagi, & Lambermon, 1992). The first conceptual model-the monotropy model of attachment-proposes that only the principal primary attachment figure (generally the mother) has an exclusive impact on the child's personality development despite the existence of other attachment figures such as the father. The second model of attachment, the hierarchy model, posits that attachment to the principal primary attachment figure, usually the mother, is the best developmental predictor, whereas relationships with subsidiary attachment figures (like the father) contribute to a lesser extent. Third, the independence model assumes that all attachment relationships are equally important for children's development, but each contributes in distinct domains. Fourth, the integration model of attachment proposes that the quality of all attachment relationships taken together as a whole is what optimally predicts outcomes.

Attachment to companion animals and loneliness in Australian adolescents

“…These models underpin the expectations and behavioural patterns that will be re‐enacted in the child's future relationships (Ainsworth, 1989; Bowlby, 1982). With the significant changes occurring in social expectations and experiences during adolescence, the security of adolescents' attachment relationships play an important role in their susceptibility to experiencing loneliness (Al‐Yagon, Kopelman‐Rubin, Brunstein Klomek, & Mikulincer, 2016).…”

Models of child–parent attachment in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Links to executive functions

“…Grounded in the multimodel methodological approach (Al‐Yagon et al, ; Liu, ; Verschueren & Marcoen, ), this study investigated the extent to which the four theorized models of attachment—monotropy, hierarchy, independence, and integration—may explain child–mother and child–father attachments' relative contribution to EF in elementary school‐age children with ADHD or TD. The findings largely supported two of the conceptual models of attachment.…”

“…Taken together, the current study aimed to simultaneously undertake empirical examination of all four of these theorized models of attachment with both parents—monotropy, hierarchy, independence, and integration—thereby extending the multi‐model methodological approach (see Al‐Yagon, Kopelman‐Rubin, Brunstein Klomek, & Mikulincer, ; Liu, ; Verschueren & Marcoen, ) by uniquely applying it to children with ADHD, who may be at high risk of insecure attachments but whose close relationships have been underinvestigated to date. Thus, this study aimed to narrow a gap in the literature regarding attachments and EF deficits in elementary‐school‐age children with and without ADHD.…”

Vinculação e problemas de comportamento avaliados por crianças e pais

“…Confirma-se, em novas gerações, o efeito negativo de vinculações inseguras aos pais -operacionalizadas aqui por menores valores nas dimensões "Confiança-proximidade afetiva" e "Comunicação" com aos pais, e maior perceção de "Rejeição" da parte dos pais. Representações negativas das relações com os pais conduzem a expectativas de que não poderão contar com eles para a resolução das suas angústias, propiciando, por seu turno, representações negativas de si próprio (como não merecendo ser apoiado, ou compreendido pelas figuras significativas); exprimindo-se esse mal-estar, eventualmente, por perturbações externalizadas e/ou internalizadas, consoante o sujeito (Al-Yagon, Kopelman-Rubin, Klomek, & Mikulincer, 2016;Follan & Minnis, 2009;de Vries, Hoeve, Stams, & Asscher). Um dado interessante neste estudo foi a constatação do acordo entre a perceção dos problemas de comportamento reportados pelos pré-adolescentes e a perceção dos seus pais sobre esses mesmos comportamentos -concordância expressa nas correlações significativas encontradas entre avaliações dos filhos, e avaliações dos pais sobre a magnitude dos problemas de comportamento.…”

“…Para além destas variáveis, as representações construídas na infância (i.e., os modelos operantes internos do self e relações) serão atualizados, não apenas por eventuais alterações nas condições de vida, como pela revisão de representações passadas, (re)interpretadas agora à luz de novas competências cognitivas, como a "teoria da mente", e, mais tarde, pelo acesso ao pensamento formal (Machado, 2003), que permite novas formas de reanalisar experiências anteriores (Arranz, Artamedi, Olabarrieta, & Martín, 2002). Porém, os padrões inseguros de vinculação podem desencadear mecanismos defensivos que induzem exclusões de informação, e/ou incapacidade para integrar diferentes tipos de informação acerca das experiências vinculativas (Al-Yagon, Kopelman-Rubin, Klomek, & Mikulincer, 2016;de vries, Hoeve, Stams, & Asscher, 2016), num processo que "alivia o self da culpa, e do autoconceito negativo" (de vries et al, 2016). Como as vinculações inseguras levam a maior relutância em partilhar experiências com os pais, menor monitorização, e menor comunhão de vivências, o afastamento/rejeição torna-se, para esses, mais provável, mesmo que os próprios (i.e., filhos e pais) não se apercebam a priori.…”