Transitional object use, attachment, and help‐seeking behaviour in Taiwanese adolescents

Abstract

Transitional object use is psychologically beneficial for young children, but research has suggested that maintaining transitional object use into middle childhood may be associated with negative behaviour. Little is known about the continuation of transitional object use into adolescence, and few studies have been conducted with non-Western populations. To examine differences in attachment and attitudes to help seeking in adolescents who did and did not use a transitional object, 723 adolescents from Taiwan (M age = 14 years) were asked about their current and past use of transitional objects. Measures of attachment were obtained using the Revised Adult Attachment Scale, and attitude toward help was measured using the Attitudes Toward Seeking Professional Psychological Help Scale. In total, 37% of the sample continued transitional object use in adolescence. Current use of a transitional object differentiated the sample on the measures of attachment and help seeking. Transitional object users were less likely to have secure attachments and less likely to express positive attitudes toward seeking help. Transitional object use is prevalent in Taiwanese adolescents, and we suggest that continued use of a transitional object acts as an indicator of potential withdrawal from support offered in schools.

Smartphone Attachment and Self-Regulation Mediate the Influence of Avoidant Attachment Style on Phubbing

“…Individuals with insecure attachment will often perceive these attachment objects as reliable because the sources, lacking agency, are always physically there for them [28]. Stagg and Li [30] examined the relationship between insecure attachment and the intensity of attachment to objects among children and found empirical evidence that, relative to securely attached children, the insecurely attached were more likely to develop a more intense attachment to transitional objects. Based on the theoretical and empirical evidence mentioned above, it is reasonable to expect individuals with an insecure attachment style, such as those higher in attachment avoidance, to develop stronger attachments toward nonhuman objects.…”