Cortisol secretion moderates the association between mother–infant attachment at 17 months and child behavior at age 5 years

Abstract

This study examined infant cortisol secretion as a moderator of the association between mother–infant attachment security at age 17 months and child behavior at age 5 years. A longitudinal community sample of 96 mother–child dyads participated in the strange situation procedure (SSP) at age 17 months. Cortisol was collected at baseline, and at 20 and 40 min post‐SSP. Maternal reports of child behavior were collected at age 5 years. Results revealed that the associations between nonsecure mother–infant attachment and higher total, internalizing, and externalizing behavior were stronger for infants with high cortisol secretion, relative to infants with low cortisol secretion. The model of interaction differed depending on the outcome, with diathesis‐stress explaining variance in total as well as internalizing behavior, and with differential susceptibility explaining variance in externalizing behavior. These findings augment our understanding of risk and resilience to the impact of the early rearing environment on later psychopathology.

Physiological Factors Linking Insecure Attachment to Psychopathology: A Systematic Review

“…Literature on neurophysiological correlates of attachment has flourished in recent years, but much of this work has focused, for example, on Gene x Environment research designs to determine what genetic factors influence pathways from insecure attachment to psychopathology [ 138 , 139 ] or has used endocrine mediators [ 140 ]. Assuming that both early attachment experiences and current attachments influence emotional regulation skills [ 49 ] and that emotional regulation is closely linked to psychopathological occurrence [ 141 , 142 ], creating a multi-layered search field from outside to inside, future research should more fully explore the connection with physiological measures, psychopathology and risk factors.…”

Parent–child relationship quality and adolescent health: Testing the differential susceptibility and diathesis‐stress hypotheses in African American youths

“…Moreover, they vary depending on whether their results supported the differential susceptibility or the diathesis‐stress premises. One group of studies found that effects were stronger for individuals showing elevated baseline cortisol (Wagner et al, 2019) or cortisol reactivity (Bair‐Merritt et al, 2015; Hastings et al, 2011; Nofech‐Mozes et al, 2019; Saxbe et al, 2012) to psychosocial challenges. On the other hand, the risk of developing problem behaviors diminished remarkably for individuals with blunted cortisol responses (i.e., they demonstrated fewer health problems compared to their high‐reactive peers).…”

“…Taken together, there is a conflicting support in the literature for both differential susceptibility and diathesis‐stress models. A number of factors may attribute to these divergent findings, including variations in the type of rearing environments (Kuhlman et al, 2018) and subsequent health outcomes (Nofech‐Mozes et al, 2019), as well as the type of psychosocial and laboratory challenges used to induce stress and emotional responses. In their meta‐analysis, Bunea et al (2017) reported a moderate effect size across studies that examined the effects of childhood adversity on salivary cortisol responses to social stress.…”

“…This raises the empirical question of whether the same pattern of findings would be evident among other ethnic and racial groups, particularly people of color and marginalized groups who might have experienced different types (e.g., racial discrimination) and levels of adversity throughout their life, starting in utero (Conradt et al, 2020). Therefore, given such incongruent findings in the literature, it may not be feasible to make a priori hypotheses about the type (i.e., diathesis‐stress vs. differential susceptibility) or nature (i.e., low vs. high cortisol responses) of the interaction effects that would apply to any given population and rearing environment (Nofech‐Mozes et al, 2019; Roisman et al, 2012).…”

“…Participant age is another important factor that may contribute to these divergent findings. Studies have largely reported findings in support of either the differential susceptibility or the diathesis stress models among infants and younger children (early to middle childhood; ages 4–8 years old) who showed heightened physiological stress responsivity (e.g., Nofech‐Mozes et al, 2019; Obradović et al, 2010; Wagner et al, 2019). In older children and adolescents (ages 9–16 years old), however, studies seem to report evidence for blunted physiological stress responses as a biomarker of susceptibility to harsh and or nurturing rearing conditions (e.g., Diamond et al, 2012; Kuhlman et al, 2018; Sijtsema et al, 2013).…”