1 / 29

Joseph Tan Elenda Hessel Emily Loeb Megan Schad Joanna Chango Joseph Allen

Long-Term Relational Sequelae of Adolescent Attachment State of Mind. Joseph Tan Elenda Hessel Emily Loeb Megan Schad Joanna Chango Joseph Allen. Collaborators. Co-authors Elenda Hessel Emily Loeb Megan Schad , Ph.D Joanna Chango , Ph.D Joseph Allen, Ph.D. Collaborators

braith
Download Presentation

Joseph Tan Elenda Hessel Emily Loeb Megan Schad Joanna Chango Joseph Allen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Long-Term Relational Sequelae of Adolescent Attachment State of Mind Joseph Tan ElendaHessel Emily Loeb Megan Schad Joanna Chango Joseph Allen

  2. Collaborators Co-authors ElendaHessel Emily Loeb Megan Schad, Ph.D Joanna Chango, Ph.D Joseph Allen, Ph.D Collaborators Samantha Perry Rachel Narr Christopher Hafen, Ph.D Lauren Molloy, Ph.D Erik Ruzek, Ph.D We gratefully acknowledge grant support from NICHD (PI: Joseph P. Allen, 9R01-HD058305).

  3. Attachment in Adolescence • Extending what we know about sequelae of attachment into adulthood • One domain to look at: romantic relationships

  4. Primary Question • What are the long-term implications of individual differences in adolescent attachment state of mind for romantic relationships?

  5. Key Area: Romantic Relationships • Why? • Normative developmental experience (Carver, Joyner, & Udry, 2003) • Primary relationship as adolescence transition into adulthood (Laursen & Williams, 1997; Kobak, Rosenthal, Zajac, & Madsen, 2007) • Developmentally significant (Collins, Welsh, & Furman, 2009) • What might be important to know about romantic relationships?

  6. Key Domains of Romantic Relationships • Navigating emotionally-sensitive interactions • Predicts longevity of relationships (Bernier & Dozier, 2002; Shulman, Tuval-Mashiach, Levran, & Anbar, 2006) • Full of challenges (Furman & Shomaker, 2008; Kobak et al., 2007) • Two examples of common emotionally-sensitive interactions • Support-seeking situations • Discussions of conflict in the relationships

  7. Sample • Subsample: 111 adolescents in romantic relationships at either age 18 or age 21 • Full sample: 184 Adolescents (followed from age 13 to 27), their Parents, Best Friends, Other Friends, Romantic Partners • Intensive Interviews and Observations with all parties (Total N over first 13 years ~ 3200). • Equal numbers of Males and Females • Socio-economically Diverse (Median Family Income= $40- $60K) • 31% African American;  69% European American • Very Low Attrition (98% participation rate in current phase)

  8. Attachment State of Mind • Adult Attachment Interview (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1996) • Interviewed at age 14 • AAI Q-set (Kobak et al., 1993) • Security scale • Spearman-Brown interrater reliability = 0.82

  9. Results: Supportive Behavior • Maintaining engagement while giving support (Supportive Behavior Task, Allen et al., 2001) • With a close friend (age 14) • With a romantic partner (ages 18 and 21)

  10. Results: Supportive Behavior • Typical support-seeking topics: • With close friend (age 14): • Problems with siblings • Joining a sports team • With romantic partner (ages 18, 21): • Career choices • Moving

  11. Prediction of Supportive Behaviors Age 14 Age 18 Secure attachment state of mind Engagement with romantic partner .38** Note: All coefficients are standardized betas *p< .05, **p< .01, ***p < .001

  12. Prediction of Supportive Behaviors Age 14 Age 21 Engagement with romantic partner Secure attachment state of mind .23*

  13. Prediction of Supportive Behaviors Age 14 Age 18 Secure attachment state of mind Romantic partner’s engagement .48***

  14. Prediction of Supportive Behaviors Age 14 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind Romantic partner’s engagement .33**

  15. Prediction of Supportive Behaviors over and above Covariates Age 14 Age 18 Secure attachment state of mind .40** Romantic partner’s engagement .36*** Engagement with close friend .19

  16. Prediction of Supportive Behaviors over and above Covariates Age 14 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind .31** Romantic partner’s engagement .36*** Engagement with close friend .11

  17. Mediation Model for Supportive Behaviors Age 14 Age 18 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind .19 Romantic partner’s engagement Romantic partner’s engagement .36** .35* .36*** .17 Engagement with close friend .05 Total Indirect: .12 (95% CI: lower = -.01, upper = .26)

  18. Results: Conflict Resolution • Autonomy and relatedness behaviors during a disagreement (Autonomy Task, Allen et al., 2005) • With a close friend (age 14) • With a romantic partner (ages 18 and 21)

  19. Results: Conflict Resolution • Typical areas of disagreement: • With a close friend (age 14): • “Sinking ship” paradigm: Decide together who to bring to a mission to Mars • With a romantic partner (ages 18, 21): • Money • Jealousy • Moving

  20. Prediction of Conflict Resolution Age 14 Age 18 Secure attachment state of mind Autonomy and relatedness with romantic partner .51***

  21. Prediction of Conflict Resolution Age 14 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind Autonomy and relatedness with romantic partner .43***

  22. Prediction of Conflict Resolution Age 14 Age 18 Secure attachment state of mind Romantic partner’s autonomy and relatedness .34**

  23. Prediction of Conflict Resolution Age 14 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind Romantic partner’s autonomy and relatedness .30**

  24. Prediction of Conflict Resolution over and above Covariates Age 14 Age 18 Secure attachment state of mind .32* Romantic partner’s autonomy and relatedness .31*** Autonomy and relatedness with close friend .07

  25. Prediction of Conflict Resolution over and above Covariates Age 14 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind .26** Romantic partner’s autonomy and relatedness .31*** Autonomy and relatedness with close friend .14

  26. Mediation Model for Conflict Resolution Age 14 Age 18 Age 21 Secure attachment state of mind .17 Romantic partner’s autonomy and relatedness Romantic partner’s autonomy and relatedness .27* .32** .31*** .06 Autonomy and relatedness with close friend .13 Total Indirect: .09 (95% CI: lower = -.01, upper = .18)

  27. Summary of Findings • Early adolescent attachment state of mind predicts: • Later supportive and conflict resolution behaviors with romantic partners • Later romantic partner’s supportive and conflict resolution behaviors • Over and above early adolescent behaviors with peers • Developmental path?

  28. Limitations • Correlational data • Other factors • Sample size

  29. Conclusions • Contributions to understanding attachment in adolescence? • Long-term (adulthood) outcomes • Setting the stage for future relationships • Affect regulation? • Implications for relationship functioning • Mechanisms: selection and evocation

More Related