MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000257734 · doi:10.1037/emo0000721

Infants’ attachment insecurity predicts attachment-relevant emotion regulation strategies in adulthood.

2020· article· en· W3000257734 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmotion · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPsychologyPsycINFODevelopmental psychologyStrange situationFriendshipEmotional securityLongitudinal studyAttachment measuresEmotional regulationExpressive SuppressionAttachment theorySocial psychologyCognitive reappraisalCognitionMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infant attachment is theorized to lay the foundation of emotion regulation across the life span. However, testing this proposition requires prospective designs examining whether attachment assessed in infancy predicts emotion regulation strategies observed in adult relationships. Using unique data from the Minnesota Longitudinal Study of Risk and Adaptation, we examined whether infant attachment assessed at 12 and 18 months in the Strange Situation were associated with attachment-relevant emotion regulation strategies coded from video-recorded conflict discussions with romantic partners at ages 20, 23, 26, and/or 35. The current research first integrated the developmental and emotion regulation literatures to identify three specific attachment-relevant emotion regulation strategies. Balanced-regulation involves being open, approach-orientated, and engaging in collaborative problem-solving. Hypo-regulation involves suppressing emotions, disengaging from close others, and engaging in superficial problem-solving. Hyper-regulation involves exaggerating emotional expressions, ruminating, and being self-focused in processing issues. Compared to stable secure infants (secure at 12 and 18 months), stable insecure infants (insecure at 12 and 18 months) displayed worse balanced-regulation and greater hypo-regulation strategies, and unstable insecure infants (insecure at 12 or 18 months) displayed greater hyper-regulation strategies, in relationship-threatening situations 20-35 years later. Conceptually replicating these results, greater friendship insecurity at age 16 predicted worse balanced-regulation and greater hypo- and hyper-regulation strategies during relationship-threatening situations in adulthood. These findings highlight that infant attachment insecurity is associated with distinct emotion regulation strategies in adulthood 20-35 years later. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it