Links between early and concurrent attachment and reflective functioning in young adulthood.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Links between reflective functioning (RF; the ability to conceive of mental states and to interpret human behavior accordingly) and concurrent attachment security have been found in both childhood and adulthood. However, the respective contributions of early and concurrent attachment security in adult RF remain unknown. This study examines the contributions of attachment security to the mother in early childhood and of concurrent attachment security to each parent in young adults' RF. Eighty-one low-risk participants (49 girls and 32 boys) from average income families took part in this longitudinal study. Attachment security was assessed at 4 years of age with a composite measure of mother-reported Attachment Q-Sort and observer ratings of the quality of mother-child interactions. At age 23, the Attachment Multiple Model Interview was administered to assess participants' attachment security to each parent. RF was coded from the participants' attachment narratives using the Reflective Functioning Scale. Attachment security to the mother at age 4 was found to be associated with RF in adulthood. Also, an interactive effect between attachment to the mother and attachment to the father in adulthood was related to RF, suggesting that attachment with one parent moderates the effect of attachment with the other parent on RF. These findings emphasize the importance of both early and concurrent attachment security in the capacity to understand mental states in adulthood. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".