Parent-Child Attachment: A Principle-Based Concept Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Extensive evidence indicates that the quality of parent-child attachment is related to later socio-emotional and physical health outcomes. Yet, despite its clinical relevance, the parent-child attachment concept has been inconsistently applied across the disciplines of nursing, medicine and psychology and is often conflated with parent-child bonding in nursing literature. Objectives To provide readers with a critical analysis of the concept of parent-child attachment. Using a principle-based concept analysis, we clarify how parent-child attachment is understood from a multidisciplinary perspective to advance the use of this concept in nursing practice. Concept Description: Attachment is an affectionate, mutually satisfying relationship between a child and a caregiver that serves the purpose of making the child feel safe, secure, and protected. Discussion In this principle-based concept analysis, each definitional (i.e., epistemological, pragmatic, linguistic, and logical) principle contributes to an understanding of the strengths and limitations of the state of science about this concept. The discussion highlights how applying the concept of parent-child attachment security may offer exciting and promising opportunities for nursing clinical work with families. Conclusion The understanding of the concept of parent-child attachment differs among disciplines of nursing, medicine and psychology and offers exciting and promising opportunities for clarity and collaborative, multi-disciplinary work.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".