Attachment representations of school-aged Korean children: comparing family drawing and narrative assessments in a clinical and a community sample

Abstract

This study explored the links between two different methods of assessing children's attachment representations, a narrative task (the Manchester Attachment Story Task, MCAST) and a drawing task (the Family Drawing Task, FDT), in a clinical sample of 51 and a community sample of 45 Korean children aged 7-9. In both samples, attachment classifications derived from the MCAST were related to attachment classifications and global ratings derived from the FDT. In addition, rates of insecure attachment determined by MCAST classifications and by FDT global scales indicative of insecure attachment were higher in the clinical sample than the community sample. Variations in attachment patterns for these Korean samples are discussed in relation to Korean child-rearing customs. Results of this study contribute to the cross-cultural validation of both of these instruments, as well as extending our understanding of patterns of attachment in Korea from infancy to middle childhood.

Children’s family drawings: association with attachment representations in story stem narratives and social and emotional difficulties

“…The association between the two measures on attachment security classification was not statistically significant. These findings do not replicate a previous study which found a significant association and higher agreement between the two measures (Jin et al, 2018). One possible explanation of the difference in findings between the two studies could be attributed to developmental reasons.…”

“…Additionally, Fihrer and McMahon (2009) found that 62% of children between 6 and 8 years old were classified insecure. These distributions are different to those reported by Jin et al (2018) who found less than half of the drawings (38%) classified insecure in a sample of Korean boys. However, their study relied on overall classifications than individual signs.…”

“…For instance, Wagner and colleagues (2015) did not find an association between CP and drawing-based global ratings of attachment in a large sample of non-urban at risk of social disadvantage families. Furthermore, Jin et al (2018) did not find significant differences in the number of children classified insecure in the clinical vs. community sample, suggesting low association with child psychopathology. The variation in the findings of the association between child social and emotional difficulties and attachment classification based on drawings across studies suggests that further research is required to understand it.…”

“…Use of different versions of the Kaplan and Main (1986) coding classification system could comprise another reason. Jin et al (2018) report that they relied on overall attachment classification and not on individual signs, whereas the coding scheme we used included part of the original individual signs (n = 53) included in the original Kaplan and Main (1986) scheme (Pianta & Longmaid, 1999). On the other hand, it is worth noting that Pace et al (2020) also failed to find a match between secure and insecure classification on the family drawings and the MCAST in a small sample of Italian children between the ages of 5 and 8 years old.…”

“…The Manchester Child Attachment Story Task (MCAST; is one of the most common story stem methods of attachment classification and uses doll play to allow the child to act out the story stems (Solomon & George, 2016). Jin, Chung, and Hazen (2018) contrasted the Kaplan and Main (1986) classification system with the MCAST in a community and a clinical sample of Korean children between 7 and 9 years old and found that the MCAST classifications were related to the classifications derived from the family drawings in both samples. Pace, Guerriero, and Zavattini (2020) used 24 individual markers to classify family drawings in attachment categories in a clinical and small (n = 12) community sample of Italian children between the ages of 5 and 8 years old.…”