A Meta-Analysis of Time between Maternal Sensitivity and Attachment Assessments: Implications for Internal Working Models in Infancy/Toddlerhood
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This meta-analysis of maternal sensitivity and infant/toddler attachment security includes 41 studies with 2243 dyads. Its purpose is to explore the impact of time between assessments of maternal sensitivity and attachment security on the strength of association between these two constructs. We also examined the interrelationships between this moderator variable and other moderators identified in the literature, such as age and risk status of the sample. We found an overall effect size of r = .27 linking sensitivity to security. However, time between assessment of sensitivity and attachment security moderates this effect size, such that: (1) effect sizes decrease dramatically as one moves from concurrent to nonconcurrent assessments, and (2) temporally distant assessments are a sufficient condition for small effect size; that is, if the time between assessments is large, then a relatively small effect size linking sensitivity and attachment is certain. We also found that time between sensitivity and attachment assessments may account for earlier findings indicating that effect sizes linking sensitivity to security differ according to age of child and sample risk status. Findings are discussed in terms of internal working models and environmental stability.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it