Predictions of adolescents' responses to the Youth Self-Report from parental attachment interviews collected during pregnancy: a 17-year longitudinal study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the influence of parents' Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) responses prior to the birth of a first child, on self-reported mental health symptoms of the first-born child in mid-adolescence. The sample comprised 51 first-born children aged 16 years, their mothers and fathers from a low-risk community urban sample, White, British and 70% middle class. Mothers' responses to the AAI were the strongest predictor of their adolescent children's self-reported mental health symptoms. Children's infant-mother or infant-father attachment patterns were not predictive of these 16-year outcomes, but mothers' insecure (primarily dismissing) attachment representations predicted children's externalizing, aggressive, and delinquent difficulties (though not internalizing difficulties) at 16 years. If one or both parents were autonomous-secure in their response to the AAI then their adolescent children reported significantly fewer mental health problems. Discussion focuses on thepredictive validity of the Adult Attachment Interview, Mary Main's legacy, and possible meanings (and limitations) of the results.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".