Attachment priming and state attachment

• In Event: Poster Session 07
  In Poster Session: PS 07 Topic - Parenting & Parent-Child Relationships

Abstract

Traditionally, attachment is seen as a relatively stable construct. However, recent research points at a more dynamic component of attachment: state attachment. State attachment shifts in response to contextual cues, which suggests that it could be influenced by priming procedures. Previous priming research in adults supports this idea, but similar research in middle childhood has been absent. The current study tested attachment priming effects on middle childhood state attachment variation. Moreover, we tested whether children who are more securely attached at trait level, show less state attachment variability.
Method and Procedure. 62 Belgian children and their mother participated in the current study, consisting of three measurement points. At baseline, we measured Secure Base Script knowledge, self-reported trait secure attachment and state secure, anxious, and avoidant attachment. Self-reported state secure, anxious, and avoidant attachment were measured again after three (neutral, secure, and avoidant attachment) primes that were administered in counter-balanced order in three consecutive weeks. To prime secure and avoidant attachment, children first read a story about a fictional character experiencing secure or avoidant attachment and then were encouraged to talk about a similar situation they experienced.
Results. To investigate the effect of attachment priming on state attachment, we analyzed the data with repeated measures ANOVA including state attachment at four timepoints as within-subject factors. After exposure to a secure attachment prime, secure state attachment increased, F(1, 60) = 8.45, p = .005, and state avoidant attachment decreased, F(1, 60) = 4.73, p = .034. Surprisingly, exposure to an avoidant prime increased state secure attachment, F(1, 60) = 8.95, p = .004., and decreased state avoidant attachment, F(1, 60) = 5.41, p = .023. Levels of state anxious attachment were not influenced by attachment priming (See Table 1). Additionally, only one out of 16 moderation analyses tested with the PROCESS macro of SPSS found that trait attachment moderated the priming effect on state attachment changes (see Figure 1, b = 13.89, p = .031). However, when we controlled for multiple testing, this effect also disappeared.
Conclusion. As predicted, the effects of the secure prime increased state secure attachment and decreased state avoidant attachment. Against predictions, the effect of the avoidant prime was similar to the effect of the secure prime. Regarding our moderation analyses, results confirmed that children lower on trait secure attachment changed more in state secure attachment due to the primes. Unexpectedly, the secure attachment prime had a more negative effect on change in state secure attachment. However, one should be cautious because the latter effect was only small, and it disappeared after controlling for multiple testing. More research is needed to test the robustness and explanation of this effect. In sum, the study’s findings were mixed, with some support for our hypothesis that the dynamic component of state attachment can be influenced by attachment priming but more research is needed to investigate whether some of the unexpected findings replicate with an improved paradigm.

Authors

• Bien Cuyvers, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven)
  Presenting Author

• Guy Bosmans, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven)
  Non-Presenting Author

• Marinus H. van IJzendoorn, University College London (UCL)
  Non-Presenting Author

• Marian J Bakermans-Kranenburg, ISPA Lisbon
  Non-Presenting Author

• Angela Rowe, University of Bristol
  Non-Presenting Author