Poster #138 - Does Parent-Infant Synchrony in the FFSF Predict Later Attachment?

• In Event: 1-061 - Poster Session 02
  In Poster Session: PS 02 Section - Parenting & Parent-Child Relationships

Integrative Statement

Parental responsivity, contingent moment-to-moment responses to child expressive actions, form a basis for later infant social emotional functioning (Beebe & Steele, 2013). When a parent responds to their smiling infant with a smile of their own, or to a crying child with a soothing voice, they are contingently responding to the infant’s actions. Infants begin to expect those responses and adjust their behavior accordingly. However, the association between parent responsivity and attachment outcomes is unclear. While some research suggests that high responsivity leads to secure attachment outcomes (Volker et al., 1999), others have found that increased responsivity leads to insecure or disorganized attachment outcomes (Wille et al., 1991; Jaffe et al., 2001).

We used the Maternal Lifestyle Study (MLS) sample, a longitudinal 4-site study of the effects of prenatal cocaine and/or opiate (C/O) exposure (Lester et al., 2001; Lester et al., 2003). The MLS is a longitudinal project that includes the Face-to-Face/Still-Face (FFSF) at 4 months and the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP) at 18 months. In the FFSF, during three successive two-minute episodes, mothers are asked to "play with [baby's name] as you would at home” (FF), to "maintain a still-face and look at the baby without talking, smiling, touching the baby or interacting in any way" (SF), and then to start "playing again with [baby's name]" (RE). Infants’ and mothers’ behaviors were coded using the Infant and Caregiver Engagement Phases (ICEP), an ordinal coding system of facial expressions, direction of gaze, and vocalizations (Weinberg & Tronick, 1998; Weinberg et al., 1999). Examiner-infant face-to-face interactions were also coded in a fourth episode. In the SSP, expert coders assigned an attachment category (Avoidant (A), Secure (B), Resistant (C), or Disorganized (D)).

687 dyads were included in this sample. The MLS dataset includes both C/O exposed and comparison infants and follow up comparisons of risk were also conducted. We calculated a composite risk score (Range 0-10) by summing dichotomized risk variables including drug exposure and social factors (Seifer et al., 1996). For this analysis, synchrony was used as a proxy for responsivity; infant and mother in-time ICEP scores were correlated.

There was a small but significant correlation between infant and mother ICEP scores in time for the FF (r=.18), RE (r=.16), and examiner (r=.19) but not for the SF (r=.02). A multilevel model comparing attachment outcome groups found no differences across attachment categories for any of the episodes of the FFSF, either with the mother or with the examiner. There were also no associations between risk scores and the correlation of infant and parent or infant and examiner behaviors.

Previous studies of parent-infant synchrony suggested there are distinct patterns early in development that predict later attachment outcomes (Isabella & Belsky, 1991; Isabella, 1998). We found no association between parent-infant synchrony and attachment outcomes. These null results in a large, longitudinal sample raise important questions regarding the long term implications of parental responsivity. We are now following up these synchrony analyses to examine infant and mother responsivity.

Authors

• Emily Barbara Prince, University of Miami
  Presenting Author

• Daniel Messinger, University of Miami
  Non-Presenting Author

• Elena Tenenbaum, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Stephen Sheinkopf, Brown University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Edward Tronick, University of Massachusetts Boston
  Non-Presenting Author

• Linda LaGasse, Brown University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Ronald Seifer, Brown University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Barry Lester, Brown University
  Non-Presenting Author