Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
BRIEF REPORT
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Roberto Baiocco
Barry H. Schneider
Sheri Madigan
University of Ottawa
Leslie Atkinson
Ryerson University
A central tenet of Bowlbys attachment theory is that early child caregiver attachment is reflected in the
quality of the childs interpersonal relationships throughout life. Schneider, Atkinson, and Tardif (2001)
conducted a meta-analysis of studies conducted up to 1998 to corroborate that contention. They found a
significant but small to moderate effect size (r .20). Their finding that studies of friendship bonds had
higher effect sizes than studies of other interpersonal relationships has important theoretical ramifications. The present brief report is a meta-analysis that covers research conducted for the same purpose
since 1998. The sample consists of 44 studies with a total of 8505 participants. The overall effect size
r of .19 (adjusted r .12; 95% confidence interval, .08 .17) in the current study was similar in
magnitude to the effect size reported in the 2001 meta-analysis, documenting consistency in the
predictive power of attachment theory. However, we failed to replicate the moderating effect of
friendship. One possible explanation for these findings is that the friendships of school-age children and
adolescents no longer invoke very high levels of intimacy. Effect sizes are higher in studies conducted
outside North America than in U.S.- and Canada-based studies.
Keywords: attachment, meta-analysis, peer relations
Caregiver child attachment influences the quality of close interpersonal relationships later in the childs life (Bowlby, 1973).
However, the complexity of hypothesized intervening mechanisms
and their abstractness make it difficult to translate the complex
components of this theory into empirical research (Thompson &
Raikes, 2003). Perhaps the most challenging obstacle is the reality
that internal working modelsmental representations of the attachment bondsare not readily amenable to empirical measurement. Further, the processes linking early child caregiver attachment to behavior and relationships later in life act in interplay with
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Method
Selection of Studies
To generate samples comparable with the 2001 meta-analysis,
we used the same keywords in searching PSYCINFO, PUBMED
and ProQuest Dissertations. We also scanned the references of
articles retrieved and contacted researchers working in this area.
Our search included studies available between 1999 and 2012.
Inclusion/exclusion criteria were identical to those used in the
2001 meta-analysis: original data, measure of attachment to a
119
parent other than self-report, collected before the child reached age
18, include a quantitative measure of childrens peer relations
other than self-report, feature assessment of attachment and peer
relations, include data on securely and insecurely attached participants or a continuous measure of attachment, written in English or
another language understood by our research team (French, Italian,
Spanish). These criteria resulted in inclusion of 44 studies with
8505 participants. Each study was coded for the following: a)
attachment measure (e.g., Strange situation, Q-sort); b) attachment
figure (e.g., father, mother); c) dimension(s) of peer relations (e.g.,
peer-directed aggression, friendship, prosociality); d) source of
information about peer relations (e.g., observation, peer report,
teacher report); e) degree of familiarity (peers or friends); f) gender
of child; g) mean age of participants when attachment and h) peer
relations were measured; i) time between the measurement of
attachment and peer relations; j) specific subject characteristics
(e.g., diagnosed atypical behavior, low SES, parents divorced); k)
country; l) publication date; and m) dissemination (i.e., journal
article, thesis, book). Agreement on coding and application of
inclusion/exclusion criteria was established by having the second
author corate; agreement between first and second authors was
94%.
Meta-Analytic Procedures
We calculated effect size as r, the correlation between attachment security and peer relations outcome. Where studies involved
multiple outcomes (e.g., popularity, leadership, withdrawal), we
calculated a mean effect size, such that each study is represented
by one effect in a given meta-analysis. However, many studies
included measures of both friendship and peer relations, such that
the exclusion of either would result in substantial data loss. Because the distinction between close friendships and relations with
other peers may be particularly important (Schneider et al., 2001),
we followed Hallion and Ruscios (2011) strategy of conducting
three nonindependent meta-analyses. The first included all peer
relations studies, the second included only close friendships, and
the third involved only peers who were not close friends.
We conducted analyses as outlined by Borenstein et al. (2009)
using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 2.0 software (Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2005). We used random
effects analyses. All effect sizes were weighted by sample size. We
adjusted the observed values to account for potential publication
bias using Duval and Tweedies (2000) trim-and-fill procedures.
We used Q-statistics to assess heterogeneity of effect sizes across
studies. We used Q-statistics and method of moments regression
analyses to assess for moderating effects in the full sample (Borenstein et al., 2009), when the number of studies warranted it; we
did not pursue the search for moderators in the close friendship and
nonclose friendship subsamples because of low power.
Results
Effect Sizes Involving Total Sample
Random effects analyses indicated an overall effect size of r
.19, p .001; 95% confidence interval (CI) .15.23 (see Figure
1). Duval and Tweedies trim-and-fill procedure resulted in an
estimated unbiased effect size of r .12, CI .08 .17. Effect
120
Meta Analysis
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Study name
Lower
limit
0.298
0.252
0.310
0.195
0.541
0.215
0.195
0.210
-0.293
0.064
-0.204
0.202
0.190
-0.001
0.375
0.466
0.120
0.320
0.080
0.211
0.193
0.250
0.209
0.451
0.208
0.243
0.207
0.430
0.194
0.004
0.110
0.260
0.050
0.160
0.209
0.190
0.191
0.054
0.087
0.052
0.310
0.240
0.240
0.152
0.164
0.084
0.054
0.065
-0.008
0.408
0.054
0.011
0.036
-0.503
-0.237
-0.459
0.059
-0.183
-0.255
0.058
0.193
-0.025
0.121
-0.075
0.019
0.008
0.054
0.053
0.200
0.058
0.094
-0.016
0.089
0.053
-0.187
-0.106
0.087
-0.095
-0.062
0.072
0.004
0.005
-0.177
-0.282
-0.003
0.136
-0.082
-0.101
-0.097
0.138
Upper
limit
0.486
0.431
0.520
0.383
0.652
0.365
0.367
0.372
-0.051
0.354
0.082
0.336
0.515
0.253
0.623
0.672
0.260
0.494
0.231
0.388
0.365
0.427
0.355
0.646
0.349
0.382
0.411
0.681
0.328
0.195
0.316
0.418
0.193
0.367
0.338
0.364
0.364
0.279
0.434
0.107
0.465
0.516
0.531
0.383
0.190
Z-Value p-Value
2.697
2.484
2.462
1.884
6.878
2.603
2.072
2.355
-2.357
0.410
-1.403
2.763
0.999
-0. 008
2.299
3.194
1.627
3.093
1.011
2.153
2.041
2.489
2.615
3.367
2.703
3.156
1.819
2.434
2.680
0.041
1.000
2.915
0.673
1.416
2.977
1.999
2.010
0.455
0.453
1.837
3.422
1.469
1.385
1.196
12.199
0.007
0.013
0.014
0.060
0.000
0.009
0.038
0.019
0.018
0.682
0.161
0.006
0.318
0.994
0.022
0.001
0.104
0.002
0.312
0.031
0.041
0.013
0.009
0.001
0.007
0.002
0.069
0.015
0.007
0.968
0.317
0.004
0.501
0.157
0.003
0.046
0.044
0.649
0.650
0.066
0.001
0.142
0.166
0.232
0.000
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
Favours A
Figure 1.
0.50
1.00
Favours B
Forest plots showing the association between attachment and peer relations.
procedure resulted in slight modification, with an estimated unbiased effect size of r .14, CI .07.19.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Discussion
The overall average effect size in the new sample is similar to
that reported by Schneider et al. in 2001. This bolsters the contention that early childparent bonds are related to childrens
subsequent relationships with peers. There are, however, some
important differences in the moderators of effect size in the two
meta-analyses. We failed to replicate the previous finding that
effect sizes are higher for friendship than for other aspects of peer
relations. Accordingly, the following section pertains specifically
to the two subsamples on friendship although the sample sizes are
too small for statistical comparison. The discussion concludes with
some remarks on the implications of the small-to-moderate overall
effect, which emerged in both this and the previous meta-analysis.
There were comparable numbers of friendship studies in the two
samples, 12 in the 2001 article, and 11 in the present sample. Thus,
although the construct of friendship received more emphasis in
1990s than previously, this enthusiasm did not translate into more
research. The two samples are similar in terms of the relative
proportions of Q-sort and strange situation methods for measuring
attachment and the proportions of measurement strategies in assessing peer relations. There was, however, a substantial age
difference between the friendship subsamples in this (M 69
months) and the earlier meta-analysis (M 41 months). Age
differences cannot be invoked to explain the failure to find the
expected higher effect for friendship than for other aspects of peer
relations because age difference is in the wrong direction; intimacy
increases rather than decreases in peer relationships from school
age onward (e.g., Berndt, 2007). Therefore, the most likely explanation of this failure to replicate is that the friendships of schoolage children and adolescents are less intimate than they once were,
possibly because of the societal changes discussed earlier. Because
most contentions that intimacy is declining in relationships pertain
to the United States, this explanation might account for the significant cultural moderation that emerged only in the current
sample. It is important to remember that our nonNorth American
samples are mostly from European and Mediterranean cultures
where family life is particularly intensive and influential (Stanton,
1995) and not from Japan, for example, where extremely close and
interdependent attachment dynamics may lead to insecure attachment in the Western sense (Rothbaum, Rosen, Ujiie & Uchida,
2002). We present this interpretation of our findings with some
reticence because of the limited sample size.
Although we focused on attachment, attachment might not be
solely responsible for the predicting outcome but might predict
outcome together with other simultaneous processes (Thompson &
Raikes, 2003). This is but one possible interpretation, however, of
a recurrent pattern of small effects. Another possibility is that the
effect sizes do not fully reflect the impact of early attachment
because of the many complications mentioned at the start of the
introduction in reducing attachment theory to elements that can be
measured realistically. At this point, we can assume that the link
between attachment security and peer relations is established.
Intriguing issues remain pertaining to the potentially changing
association between attachment and close relationships and the
role that cultural factors might play.
121
References
Agnot, C. J. (2009). A proposed model of friendship quality and attachment in preschool children (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3360141)
Allen, J. P., Marsh, P., McFarland, C., McElhaney, K. B., Land, D. J.,
Jodl, K. M., & Peck, S. (2002). Attachment and autonomy as predictors
of the development of social skills and delinquency during midadolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 56 66.
doi:10.1037/0022-006X.70.1.56
Allen, J. P., Porter, M., McFarland, C., McElhaney, K. B., & Marsh, P.
(2007). The relation of attachment security to adolescents paternal and
peer relationships, depression, and externalizing behavior. Child Development, 78, 12221239. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01062.x
Allen, J. P., Porter, M. R., McFarland, F. C., Marsh, P., & Mc Elhaney,
K. B. (2005). The two faces of adolescents success with peers: Adolescent popularity, social adaptation, and deviant behavior. Child Development, 76, 747760. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00875.x
Attili, G. (2001). Ansia da separazione e misura dellattaccamento normale e Patologico [Separation anxiety and normal and psychopathological attachment measure]. Bologna, Italy: Unicopli.
Balentine, A. C. (2007). The relation of early attachment with kindergarten social preference: An examination of intervening relational and
behavioral processes (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3259667)
Bar-Haim, Y., Aviezer, O., Berson, Y., & Sagi, A. Attachment in infancy
and personal space regulation in early adolescence. Attachment & Human Development, 4, 68 83. doi:10.1080/14616730210123111
Bohlin, G., Hagekull, B., & Rydell, A. M. (2000). Attachment and social
functioning: A longitudinal study from infancy to middle childhood.
Social Development, 9, 24 39. doi:10.1111/1467-9507.00109
122
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Booth-LaForce, C., & Oxford, M. L. (2008). Trajectories of social withdrawal from grades 1 to 6: Prediction from early parenting, attachment,
and temperament. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1298 1313. doi:
10.1037/a0012954
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2005).
Comprehensive meta-analysis Version 2: A computer program for research synthesis [Computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009).
Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley. doi:10.1002/
9780470743386
Contreras, J. M., Kerns, K. A., Weimer, B. L., Gentzler, A. L., & Tomich,
P. L. (2000). Emotion regulation as a mediator of associations between
mother-child attachment and peer relationships in middle childhood.
Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 111124. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.14
.1.111
DeMulder, E. K., Denham, S., Schmidt, M., & Mitchell, J. (2000). Q-sort
assessment of attachment security during the preschool years: Links
from home to school. Developmental Psychology, 36, 274 282. doi:
10.1037/0012-1649.36.2.274
Denham, S., Mason, T., Caverly, S., Schmidt, M., Hackney, R., Caswell,
C., & DeMulder, E. (2001). Preschoolers at play: Co-socialisers of
emotional and social competence. International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 25, 290 301. doi:10.1080/016502501143000067
Diamond, L. M., & Fagundes, C. P. (2010). Psychobiological research on
attachment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 218 225.
doi:10.1177/0265407509360906
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot based
method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis.
Biometrics, 56, 455 463. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x
Dykas, M. J., Ziv, Y., & Cassidy, J. (2008). Attachment and peer relations
in adolescence. Attachment & Human Development, 10, 123141. doi:
10.1080/14616730802113679
Fletcher, G., Simpson, J. A., Campbell, L., & Overall, A. (2013). The
science of intimate relationships. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Goodwin, R. (2009). Changing relations: Achieving intimacy in a time of
social transition. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511551796
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Vaughn, B. E., El-Sheikh, M., Shin, N., Elmore-Staton, L., Krzysik, L., &
Monteiro, L. (2011). Attachment representations, sleep quality and adaptive functioning in preschool age children. Attachment & Human Development, 13, 525540. doi:10.1080/14616734.2011.608984
Verssimo, M., Santos, A. J., Vaughn, B. E., Torres, N., Monteiro, L., &
Santos, O. (2011). Quality of attachment to father and mother and
123