1. Stability and Predictors of Change in Attachment Security Across Adolescence Joseph P. Allen University of Virginia Gabriel P. Kuperminc Georgia State University Cynthia Moore Harvard Medical School Collaborators: Kathleen McElhaney, Ph.D. Janna Herman, Ph.D. Debbie Land, Ph.D. David Tate, Ph.D. Glenda Insabella, Ph.D. Kathy Bell, Ph.D. Copies of Related Papers are available on the web at: Teenresearch.org

2. How stable is attachment security across adolescence?

3. Is any of the instability in attachment security predictable?

4. Sample 125 16-year old Adolescents and their Parents Re-interviewed when Adolescents were 18 Adolescents selected to represent the “underperforming half” of their high school class Based on presence of at least one academic problem: History of grade retention History of suspension History of a single failing grade for one marking period History of at least one period with 10 or more days absent 66% African American; 33% European American Equal numbers of Males and Females Highly Socio-economically Diverse (Median Family Income= $27,000)

5. Measures: Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1996) 1-hour semi-structured interview Attachment security: Reflects coherence in discourse about episodic and semantic memories of attachment experiences. Openness to remembering and discussing affectively charged attachment experiences Balance in considering positive and negative aspects of attachment relationships Reliably coded using Kobak et al., (1993) Q-sort technique Interrater reliability =.84; Concordance with Security Classifications = 74%

6. Simple Correlation Adolescent Attachment Security At Age 16 and Age 18:.61***

7. Mean Change Over Time in Attachment Security

8. Individual Change Over Time in Attachment Security Attachment Security Age 1618

9. Individual Change Over Time in Attachment Security Attachment Security Age 1618

10. Individual Change Over Time in Attachment Security Attachment Security Age 1618

11. Friendly Handling of Disagreements De-Idealization Maternal Supportiveness Sensitivity. 21 *. 42**. 28** Adolescent Security. 81***. 25*** Mother-Adolescent Secure-Base One Post-hoc Model of the Prediction of Adolescent Attachment Security RMSEA =.043  2 = 24.22 p >.23 SRCD, 2001:

12. Friendly Handling of Disagreements De-Idealization Maternal Supportiveness Sensitivity. 21 *. 42**. 28** Adolescent Security. 81***. 25*** Mother-Adolescent Secure-Base One Post-hoc Model of the Prediction of Adolescent Attachment Security RMSEA =.043  2 = 24.22 p >.23 Friendly Handling of Disagreements De-Idealization Autonomy Facets: SRCD, 2001: (Allen, McElhaney, Kuperminc, & Jodl, In press, Child Development)

13. Friendly Handling of Disagreements De-Idealization Maternal Supportiveness Sensitivity. 21 *. 42**. 28** Adolescent Security. 81***. 25*** Mother-Adolescent Secure-Base One Post-hoc Model of the Prediction of Adolescent Attachment Security RMSEA =.043  2 = 24.22 p >.23 SRCD, 2001: Maternal Supportiveness Sensitivity Relatedness Facets: (Allen, McElhaney, Kuperminc, & Jodl, In press, Child Development)

14. Friendly Handling of Disagreements De-Idealization Maternal Supportiveness Sensitivity. 21 *. 42**. 28** Adolescent Security. 81***. 25*** Mother-Adolescent Secure-Base One Post-hoc Model of the Prediction of Adolescent Attachment Security RMSEA =.043  2 = 24.22 p >.23 SRCD, 2001: Adolescent Security. 81*** Correspondence between AAI Security and Mother-Adolescent Secure Base Markers: (Allen, McElhaney, Kuperminc, & Jodl, In press, Child Development)

15. Friendly Handling of Disagreements De-Idealization Maternal Supportiveness Sensitivity Maternal Security -. 14+. 21 *. 42**. 28** Adolescent Security. 81***.18*. 25*** Mother-Adolescent Secure-Base One Post-hoc Model of the Prediction of Adolescent Attachment Security RMSEA =.043  2 = 24.22 p >.23 SRCD, 2001: Adolescent Security. 81*** Correspondence between AAI Security and Mother-Adolescent Secure Base Markers: (Allen, McElhaney, Kuperminc, & Jodl, In press, Child Development)

16. Lack of Peer Pressure Engaged Interaction Popularity Family Income -.14+. 41***. 39***. 29*** Adolescent Security. 72 *** -. 35*** RMSEA =.00  2 = 1.0 p >.98.32***.26*** Autonomy Facet Relatedness Facets Total Attachment to Peers Peer-Adolescent Secure-Base Adolescent Attachment Security & PEER Relationships The Peer-Adolescent “Secure-Base” SRCD, 2003:

17. Predicting Change in Adolescent Security Over Time Gradual Increase in Security with Cognitive and Emotional Development “Defensive Processing” as described by Bowlby Painful Information is excluded from consciousness Individual becomes less secure/coherent in the process Conditions Leading to Defensive Processing: Chronic/Overwhelming Attachment Needs + Inability of Attachment Figures to Meet Those Needs

18. Measures: Observations of Mother-Teen Interactions Observational Assessment of Mother and Adolescent Discussing a Significant Disagreement Dyadic Relatedness While Disagreeing - Combination of Maternal & Adolescent Behaviors Promoting the Relationship in Midst of Disagreement: –Validation of Other’s Statements & Engagement/Active Listening Overpersonalizing Behavior – Fighting with the person, not with their position. –“You’re just too young (old) to understand!” Recanting Behavior – Running from Arguments by “Changing” one’s mind. –“OK, whatever. I’ll go along.”

19. Predicting Future Attachment Security From Observed Family Interactions After Accounting for Current Security Attachment Security (Age 18)  R 2 Total R 2 Step I. Attachment Security (Age 16).61***.37*** Step II. Dyadic Relatedness (16).15+ Overpersonalizing Discussions (16)-.17* Recanting Position (16)-.08 Statistics for Step.06***.43*** Overpersonalizing Behavior (16)  Decreasing Security Over Time

20. Measures: Overall Mother-Teen Relationship Qualities Adolescent De-idealization of Mother – Can the adolescent recognize parental limits without wholesale rejection of the parent (from the Mother-Father-Peer Scale, Epstein, 1987) Maternal Supportiveness – Overall quality of support in relationship (Acceptance Scale from Mother-Father-Peer Scale + Total Attachment Scale from Inventory of Parent & Peer Attachment, Armsden & Greenberg, 1988) Maternal Attunement to Teen Self-Perceptions – Test of mothers’ ability to “guess” how their teens answered on the Adolescent Self-Perception Profile.

21. Predicting Future Attachment Security From Reported Family Interactions After Accounting for Current Security Attachment Security (Age 18)  R 2 Total R 2 Step I. Attachment Security (Age 16).62***.39*** Step II. Maternal Supportiveness (16).25** Maternal Attunement (16).08 De-idealization of mother (16)-.13 Statistics for Step.05*.44*** Maternal Supportiveness (16)  Increasing Security Over Time

22. Measures: Adolescent Family Poverty Status Family income < 200% of the Federal Poverty Line Known to be highly stressful on multiple fronts to adolescents AND to simultaneously stress parents in ways that make it hard to address the adolescent’s distress.

23. Predicting Future Attachment Security From Poverty Status in Adolescence Attachment Security (Age 18)  R 2 Total R 2 Step I. Attachment Security (Age 16).61***.37*** Step II. Adolescent Poverty Status-.18* Statistics for Step.03*.40*** Severe Poverty (16)  Decreasing Security Over Time

24. Measures: Adolescent Depressive Symptoms Total Score from the Children’s Depression Inventory Direct marker of Adolescent Distress Depression also tends to undermine familial relationships

25. Predicting Future Attachment Security From Depressive Symptoms in Adolescence Attachment Security (Age 18)  R 2 Total R 2 Step I. Attachment Security (Age 16).61***.37*** Step II. Adolescent Depressive Symptoms (Age 16) -.25** Statistics for Step.06**.43*** Adolescent Depression (16)  Decreasing Security Over Time

26. Simple Correlation Maternal Attachment Security and: Adolescent Attachment Security (Age 16):.27** Adolescent Attachment Security (Age 18):.19+

27. Predicting Future Attachment Security From Maternal Attachment Security in Adolescence Attachment Security (Age 18)  R 2 Total R 2 Step I. Attachment Security (Age 16).61***.37*** Step II. Maternal Attachment Security (Adolescents at Age 16).02 Statistics for Step.00.37*** Maternal Attachment Security is NOT related to change in Adolescent Security

28. Predicting Future Attachment Security From All Significant Predictors Simultaneously Attachment Security (Age 18)  R 2 Total R 2 Step I. Attachment Security (Age 16).61***.37*** Step II. Poverty Status (Age 16)-.18*.04*.41*** Step III. Depressive Symptoms (16)-.23**.05**.46*** Step IV. Dyadic Relatedness (Age 16).01 Overpersonalizing Discussion (Age 16)-.20** Maternal Supportiveness (Age 16).16+ Statistics for Step.06***.52*** Predictions of Change in Security are Primarily Additive, not Redundant Total  R 2 = 16% Multiple R (change predictors) =.40

29. Changing Over Time in Security for Youth With vs. Without Identified Risk Factors Sample Mean

30. Decomposing Changes in Attachment Security Risk Factors at Age 16 for Future Insecurity: Overpersonalizing Behavior in Arguments Family Poverty Status Adolescent Depressive Symptoms Low-Risk Group: At or below the sample mean on all 3 attachment risk factors High-Risk Group: At or above sample mean on at least one attachment risk factor

31. Changing Over Time in Security for Youth With vs. Without Identified Risk Factors Sample Mean

32. Changing Over Time in Security for Youth With vs. Without Identified Risk Factors Low Risk Group Sample Mean

33. Changing Over Time in Security for Youth With vs. Without Identified Risk Factors Low Risk Group High Risk Group Sample Mean

34. Security (16) Security (18) Maternal Security One Conceptual Model of the Development of Adolescent Attachment Security Maternal Factors: + + + Autonomy with Mother Relatedness with Mother

35. Security (16) Security (18) Maternal Security One Conceptual Model of the Development of Adolescent Attachment Security Maternal Factors: Peer Factors: + + + + + Autonomy with Peers Relatedness with Peers Autonomy with Mother Relatedness with Mother

36. Security (16) Security (18) Maternal Security One Conceptual Model of the Development of Adolescent Attachment Security Maternal Factors: Peer Factors: + + + + + Autonomy with Peers Relatedness with Peers Autonomy with Mother Relatedness with Mother

37. Security (16) Security (18) Maternal Security One Conceptual Model of the Development of Adolescent Attachment Security Maternal Factors: Peer Factors: - + + + + + Predictors of Change Stimuli that Overwhelm the Attachment System: Maternal Overpersonalization Family Poverty Status Adolescent Depression Autonomy with Peers Relatedness with Peers Autonomy with Mother Relatedness with Mother

38. Security (16) Security (18) Maternal Security Positive Developmental Trend in Absence of Stressors One Conceptual Model of the Development of Adolescent Attachment Security Maternal Factors: Peer Factors: - + + + + + + Predictors of Change Stimuli that Overwhelm the Attachment System: Maternal Overpersonalization Family Poverty Status Adolescent Depression Autonomy with Peers Relatedness with Peers Autonomy with Mother Relatedness with Mother

39. Limitations Non-experimental Nature of Data At-Risk Sample Need to consider other aspects of security (i.e.unresolved status) Data on fathers would be great

40. Conclusions Predictors of the development of security in adolescence are not necessarily the same as: predictors of security in childhood correlates of security in adolescence Developing insecurity is predicted by an overwhelmed attachment system with stressors that BOTH: Persistently and strongly activate the attachment system within the adolescent Undermine the capacity of attachment figures to respond to the adolescent’s needs Other factors remain to be identified and assessed Copies of this and related papers are available on the web at: Teenresearch.org