F. Christy McFarlandUniversity of Virginia

Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN, April, 2001. The author can be reached at the Department of Psychology,P O Box 400400, 102 Gilmer Hall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4400 or fcm7a@virginia.edu

We would like to thank the William T. Grant Foundation, Spencer Foundation, and National Institute of Mental Health for funding provided to Joseph Allen, Principal Investigator, for the conduct and write-up of this study.

Abstract

The present investigation sought to provide new information regarding the

interrelationship between parenting strategies and attachment relationships by

exploring the moderating links of maternal undermining relatedness on the

relationship between adolescent preoccupation and psychosocial functioning.

Data were collected from a sample of 127 adolescents (mean age 15.9 [sd

0.80]; 51.9% male; 38% minority; median family income $25,000) and their

mother figures. Regression analysis demonstrate significant moderating

effects of mothers’ undermining relatedness on the relationship between

preoccupation and internalizing outcomes and serious delinquency.

IntroductionExtensive research suggests the important function of adolescents

maintaining relatedness with parents even as they seek autonomy from them

(Allen, Hauser, Eickholt, Bell, O'Connor, 1994).

Attachment theorists propose that the attachment system serves as an

individual’s framework for understanding and organizing emotional

experience thus playing a fundamental role in how an adolescent meets such

developmental challenges (Bowlby, 1988; Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985).

Adolescents classified insecure-preoccupied in attachment are characterized

by entanglement in relationships, demonstrated by passivity or angry

frustration (Dozier & Lee, 1995). For these adolescents, adaptation within the

parenting relationship is skewed, or characterized by an excessive concern

with the relationship that impedes normative development.

Introduction (cont.)Past research demonstrates that preoccupied mental representations relate to

both externalizing and internalizing adolescent behaviors (Allen & Land, 1998;

Kobak & Cole, 1994).

Heightened attention to the attachment figure characterizes preoccupied mental

representations. Therefore, it is theoretically plausible to expect that a second

set of influences, maternal parenting strategies, work with preoccupation to

impact adolescent outcomes.

The present investigation sought to provide new information regarding the

interrelationship between parenting strategies and attachment relationships by

exploring the moderating links of maternal undermining relatedness on the

relationship between adolescent preoccupation and psychosocial functioning.

We expect preoccupation in adolescence to increase the risk of internalizing

outcomes and serious delinquency.

Method

Participants Multi-method, multi-reporter data were collected in a laboratory setting from a

sample of 127 adolescents, and their mother figures. Adolescents demonstrating at least

one academic risk factor (e.g. multiple absences, suspensions, expulsion, and low or

failing grades) were recruited through local public schools (mean age 15.9 [sd 0.80], 51.9%

male, 38% minority, median family income $25,000).

Measures

Preoccupied Attachment .

Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). This semi-structured interview (George, Kaplan, & Main)

probes individuals’ memories about their childhood relationships and experiences with

parents.

Method (cont.)

Adult Attachment Q-sort Coding System. Adolescents’ attachment organization by Q-sort

coding the AAI (George, Kaplan & Main, 1984; Kobak et al.1993). Interviews are classified

into categories for overall state of mind with respect to attachment. This study focused on

preoccupied states of mind, which in adolescence is characterized by involved anger,

rambling and poorly organized discourse in regards to attachment relationships.

Maternal Undermining of Relatedness.

Autonomy and Relatedness Coding System (ARCS). Mothers’ undermining of relatedness

was evaluated by applying the previously validated ARCS to ten minute mother-teen

discussions in a disagreement task (Allen, Hauser, Bell, Boykin & Tate, 1995). The scale for

undermining of relatedness was based upon instances where the mother interrupts,

ignores , or makes critical comments about the adolescent and/or their positions in the

disagreement . Each occurrence was coded on a scale from zero to four, and scores were

combined to provide an overall score.

Internalizing Outcomes.

Youth Self-Report (YSR). The internalizing subscale of the YSR (Achenbach and Edelbrock,

1979) was used to assess adolescent internalizing symptoms. The YSR internalizing

subscale measures withdrawal and anxiety/depression symptoms and somatic complaints

by asking the adolescent to indicate on a 3-point scale the degree to which a statement

describes them. The total scale is a sum of 30 items.

Externalizing Outcomes.

Problem Behavior Inventory (PBI). The PBI (Elliott and Egeton, 1980) was used to assess

adolescent serious delinquency. Adolescents’ reports of the frequency of which they had

performed delinquent acts in the preceeding six months on the PBI were used as a

measure of serious delinquency. Most of the delinquent acts in this scale involved

fighting, hitting, or threatening others. The total scale is a logarithmic transformation of a

sum of 6 items.

Method (cont.)

ResultsTable 1 provides simple correlations between the variables.

Table 2 presents results of hierarchical regression demonstrating significant

moderating effects of mothers’ undermining relatedness on the relationship

between teen preoccupation and internalizing outcomes (∆r2=.04, p <.05), and

serious delinquency (∆r2=.04, p <.05). This was done after accounting for

adolescent gender and race.

Figures 1 and 2 depict moderator effects with both of outcome measures:

For mothers who strongly undermined relatedness, adolescents’

preoccupation was linked to lower levels of internalizing behaviors and

serious delinquency. While, low levels of teen preoccupation was related to

higher internalizing behaviors and higher frequencies of serious delinquent

behaviors.

Table 1: Variable Correlations

--6. Adolescent Race

.07--5. Adolescent Gender

.18*.32***--4. Adolescent Internalizing Outcomes

-.09-.05.24**--3. Adolescent Serious Delinquency

-.11-.05.00.11--2. Maternal Undermining Relatedness

.16+.16+.29***.15+.05--1. Adolescent Preoccupation

6.5.4.3.2.1.Variable

+p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001

Table 2: Hierarchical Regressions

.04.22-.21*Preoccupation X Maternal Undermining Relatedness

.00.18.02Maternal Undermining Relatedness

.05.18.23**Teen Preoccupation

.03.13.16+Race

.10.10.32***Gender

∆r2r2β

Regressions Predicting Internalizing Outcomes

+p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001

Table 2: Hierarchical Regressions (cont.)

.04.09-.22*Preoccupation X Maternal Undermining Relatedness

.01.05.09Maternal Undermining Relatedness

.03.04.18*Teen Preoccupation

.008.01-.09Race

.002.002-.05Gender

∆r2r2β

Regressions Predicting Serious Delinquency

+p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001

Figure 1: Prediction of Internalizing Outcomes

-0.10

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

Low High

High Preoccupation

Low Preoccupation

Maternal Undermining Relatedness

Tee

n In

tern

aliz

ing

Ou

tco

mes

Figure 2: Prediction of Serious Delinquency

-0.7-0.6

-0.5-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.1

0

0.10.2

Low High

High Preoccupation

Low Preoccupation

Maternal Undermining Relatedness

Tee

n S

erio

us

Del

inq

uen

cy

ConclusionThese findings suggest that for preoccupied adolescents, a parenting strategy can be

associated with different outcomes than might be expected for non-preoccupied teens.

When mothers strongly undermine relatedness, the differences in internalizing outcomes

and serious delinquency between preoccupied and non-preoccupied teens dramatically

decreased. Thus, behaviors that undermine relatedness may have the effect of causing non-

preoccupied teens to question their relationships with their mothers, thereby making them

more similar to preoccupied teens who might be exhibiting internalizing symptoms and/or

delinquent behaviors as distress calls for the mother’s attention.

For preoccupied teens, a mother with higher levels of undermining relatedness is still

actively participating in the relationship and this participation may lead to the teen

restricting their distress calls for maternal attention (in the forms of internalizing symptoms

and/or delinquent behaviors).

These results highlight the importance of including characteristics of the family relationship

in investigations of the psychosocial consequences of attachment models.

ReferencesAchenbach, T.M. & Edelbrock, C.S. (1979) The child behavior profile: II, boys aged 12-16 and girls aged 6-11 and 12-16. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47(2), 223-233.

Allen, J. P., Hauser, S., Bell, K. L., Boykin, K. A., & Tate, D. C. (1995). The autonomy and relatedness coding system: A scoring manual. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Allen, J. P., Hauser, S., Eickholt, C., Bell, K., & O’Connor, T. (1994). Autonomy and relatedness in family interactions as predictors of expressions of negative adolescent affect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4,535-552.

Allen, J. P. &Land, D. (1998). Attachment in adolescence. In J. Cassidy and P.R. hver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment:Theory, research, and clinical applications.(pp.319-335). New York, NY, USA: The Guilford Press.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. New York, NY, USA,Basicbooks, Inc.

Dozier, M. and S. W. Lee (1995). “Discrepancies between self- and other-report of psychiatric symptomatology: Effects of dismissing attachment strategies.” Development & Psychopathology 7(1): 217-226.

Elliott, D.S. & Ageton, S.S. (1980) Reconciling race and class differences in self reported and official estimates of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 45, 95-110.

George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1996). Adult Attachment Interview. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley (third edition).

References (cont.)

Kobak, R. R., Sudler, N., Gamble, W. (1991). Attachment and depressive symptoms during adolescence: A developmental pathways analysis. Development & Psychopathology, 3, 461- 474.

Kobak, R. and H. Cole (1994). Attachment and meta-monitoring: Implications for adolescent autonomy and psychopathology. Disorders and dysfunctions of the self. Rochester Symposium on Developmental Psychopathology. D. T. S. L. Cicchetti. Rochester, NY, USA, University of Rochester Press. 5: 267-297.

Main, M., N. Kaplan, et al. (1985). “Security in infancy, childhood, and adulthood: A move to the level of representation.” Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 50(1-2): 66-104.