The Efficacy of Two Group Interventions on Mental Representations, Attachment Security, and Trauma Symptoms in Ethnically and Socioeconomically Minoritized Young Adolescents in an Urban Middle School

Abstract

Symptoms resulting from childhood trauma can negatively impact socioemotional well-being and school performance during early adolescence unless positive changes in attachment security and mental representations of significant relationships occur. A sample of 109 eighth grade urban students were randomly assigned to one of two weekly, one-hour, school-based group interventions—Storytelling/Story-Acting for Adolescents (STSA-A) or Mentalization-Based Treatment Group Intervention (MBT-G). The Object Relations Inventory (ORI), Adolescent Attachment Questionnaire (AAQ) and Child PSTD Stress Scale (CPSS) were administered to students and their primary group leaders at the beginning (October) and end (May) of the intervention protocol as outcome variables. Participants in both the STSA-A and MBT-G intervention conditions experienced significant increases in attachment security and decreases in trauma symptoms. Over the course of eight months of group intervention, affective valence of paternal mental representations significantly decreased for boys and for participants in the STSA-A condition, while affective valence of primary group leader mental representations significantly decreased for participants in the MBT-G condition. STSA-A and MBT-G were found to be efficacious at improving attachment security and reducing trauma symptoms in young adolescents. The strengths of each group intervention for addressing interpersonal issues unique to specific types of adolescents are discussed.

Interventions Based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Stress Reduction in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

“…In 25 cases only participants older than 18 years were included or the intervention targeted the parents instead of the children . Further seven studies were excluded because they did not assess stress [49][50][51][52][53][54][55]. Although the authors of the multiple baseline-design study by Salazar et al [55] collected data on stress, the assessment time points of the stress related outcome did not allow an integration to the meta-analysis analog to a WLC group design.…”