Using Theory and Research on Controlling Attachments to Inform the Clinical Assessment of Pre-School Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to provide a clinical assessment model for the identification of controlling attachments among parents and pre-school children who present with behavioral, emotional or functional problems. Research indicates that a large portion of pre-school children (aged 3–6 years) presenting to children’s mental health clinics display severe attachment difficulties with their primary caregivers, that is, controlling, role-reversed attachments. Given that these children are at the greatest risk for childhood social and emotional maladjustment and adult psychopathology, there is a need for their identification so that effective intervention can be implemented to mitigate the development of further child psychopathology, and ultimately prevent the inter-generational transmission of dysfunctional parent–child attachments. Clinical assessment of controlling attachments between parents and their pre-school children presenting to mental health clinics is dependent on obtaining information regarding the child’s early attachment history, the parent’s state of mind regarding their relationship with their own parents, the parent’s and child’s representations of their relationship, and assessment of interactions between the primary caregiver and the referred child. Using parent and child interviews, as well as the clinical observation of parent–child interactions, child attachment strategies, accompanying parent caregiving behaviors and relational dynamics can be uncovered and targeted for intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".