Atypical dimensions of caregiver–adolescent interaction in an economically disadvantaged sample

Abstract

The Goal-corrected Partnership Adolescent Coding System (GPACS) has shown promise in assessing a secure as well as three atypical patterns of parent-adolescent interaction during a conflict discussion. The current study of 186 economically disadvantaged families examines the degree to which four GPACS patterns: Secure/Collaborative, Punitive, Role Confused and Disoriented—account for residual change in adolescents’ social competence and maladaptive behavior (internalizing, externalizing, and risk behaviors) between ages 13 to 15. Adolescents from Secure/Collaborative dyads at age 13 were more likely to have a secure state of mind in the AAI at age 15 and showed increases in teachers’ ratings of empathy and decreases in teachers’ ratings of externalizing behaviors between ages 13 and 15. Adolescents in Disoriented dyads showed a dramatic increase in teacher-rated internalizing problems, while male adolescents in Role Confused dyads reported increased involvement in risk behaviors including unprotected sexual activity and substance use problems.

Attachment in the context of atypical caregiving

“…For example, Poehlmann-Tynan et al’s (2017) study of child attachment in the context of parental incarceration shows clearly that the development of new observational procedures and coding systems is often a prerequisite to studying attachment in high-risk contexts given the extra-scientific constraints that bedevil scholars in this area. Likewise, two other papers contained in this Special Issue describe efforts to design or further validate assessments of the quality of adolescent–parent attachments via direct observations (Kobak et al, 2017; Martin, Sturge-Apple, et al, 2017). Such methodological contributions to the literature are timely and welcome.…”

“…Judged against these goals for this Special Issue, we could not be more satisfied with the papers presented in this Special Issue, nor more grateful to the authors who contributed the studies reported herein. As the reader will no doubt recognize at a glance, the work contained in this Special Issue focuses on a notably wide range of contexts (e.g., institutional rearing; VanTieghem et al, 2017), conditions (e.g., poverty; Kobak, Zajac, Abbott, Zisk, & Bounoua, 2017), and caregiving behaviors (e.g., maltreatment; Roisman et al, 2017) likely to generate risk in relation to attachment-related individual differences, processes, and disruptions over development. In so doing, the papers presented here collectively not only (a) make significant contributions to advancing the basic science critical to acquiring a better understanding of the consequences of atypical caregiving for attachment-related outcomes but also (b) serve to further realize the translational promise of attachment theory and research to facilitate healthy development in at-risk populations via diverse attachment-related intervention efforts.…”

“…the value of studies of attachment in the context of atypical caregiving for producing methodological insights (e.g., Bailey, Tarabulsy, Moran, Pederson, & Bento, 2017; Kobak et al, 2017; Martin, Bureau, et al, 2017; Martin, Sturge-Apple, Davies, Romero, & Buckholz, 2017; Poehlmann-Tynan et al, 2017; Raby, Labella, et al, 2017; Raby, Yarger, et al, 2017);…”

“…Nonetheless, in the course of coediting the excellent papers in this Special Issue, several themes emerged repeatedly, which we believe merit some attention at the outset. As elaborated on below, these themes included the following: the value of studies of attachment in the context of atypical caregiving for producing methodological insights (e.g., Bailey, Tarabulsy, Moran, Pederson, & Bento, 2017; Kobak et al, 2017; Martin, Bureau, et al, 2017; Martin, Sturge-Apple, Davies, Romero, & Buckholz, 2017; Poehlmann-Tynan et al, 2017; Raby, Labella, et al, 2017; Raby, Yarger, et al, 2017); the continued search for biological mechanisms capable of explaining the origins and potentially enduring consequences of variation in early attachment experiences (Blaze & Roth, 2017; Fearon et al, 2017; Mulder et al, 2017; Quevedo et al, 2017; Thijssen et al, 2017); and the notable diversity of current attachment-related intervention efforts (Cassidy et al, 2017; Dubois-Comtois et al, 2017; Guild, Toth, Handley, Rogosch, & Cicchetti, 2017; Handley, Michl-Petzing, Rogosch, Cicchetti, & Toth, 2017; Humphreys, Nelson, Fox, & Zeanah, 2017; Schact et al, 2017; Suchman et al, 2017; Swain et al, 2017; Tereno et al, 2017). …”

Developmental Pathways to BPD-Related Features in Adolescence: Infancy to Age 15

“…Adolescence is a critical time of transition from dependence on the family to more autonomous functioning in the community. This transition involves expansion of activities into a variety of new domains, including intimacy/ sexuality and work or career-related studies (e.g., Kobak, Zajac, Abbott, Zisk, & Bounoua, 2017). Notably, a variety of risky self-damaging behaviors are also initiated during adolescence (e.g., DuRant, Smith, Kreiter, & Krowchuk, 1999).…”