This article was downloaded by: [Adams State University]On: 21 November 2014, At: 11:34Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Attachment & HumanDevelopmentPublication details, including instructionsfor authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rahd20

The Manchester ChildAttachment Story Task:relationship with parentalAAI, SAT and childbehaviourRuth Goldwyn , Charlie Stanley , VickySmith & Jonathan GreenPublished online: 07 Oct 2010.

To cite this article: Ruth Goldwyn , Charlie Stanley , Vicky Smith & JonathanGreen (2000) The Manchester Child Attachment Story Task: relationship withparental AAI, SAT and child behaviour, Attachment & Human Development,2:1, 71-84, DOI: 10.1080/146167300361327

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/146167300361327

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy ofall the information (the “Content”) contained in the publicationson our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication arethe opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of orendorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primarysources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any

losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses,damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever causedarising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution inany form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions ofaccess and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

The Manchester ChildAttachment Story Task:

relationship with parentalAAI, SAT and child

behaviour

RU TH GOL DWYN, CHARLIE STA NLEY, VICKYSMITH and JO NATHAN GRE EN

ABSTRACT The Manchester Attachment Story Task (MCAST) is a newmethod for eliciting the internal working model (IWM) of attachment represen-tations in children between 5 and 7 years. The instrument is described in thecompanion paper, ‘A New Method of Evaluating Attachment Representations’.This paper reports initial �ndings on a non-clinical sample comparing theMCAST with concurrent maternal attachment representation, measures ofchild temperament and behaviour, and concurrent ratings on the SeparationAnxiety Test (SAT). Ratings of disorganized attachment on the MCAST showassociation with Unresolved status on concurrent maternal Adult AttachmentInterview (AAI) and with independent teacher ratings of classroom behaviour.Child temperament shows an effect on the style of engagement with theinterview but not the attachment ratings. Possible alternative explanations forthe phenomena seen are discussed, along with potential applications of theinstrument and directions for future research.

KEYWORDS: Adult Attachment Interview – child attachment representation –Separation Anxiety Test

INTR ODUCTION

The companion paper (ref. AHD100014) described the Manchester ChildAttachment Story Task (MCAST) and addressed its content and constructvalidity and data relating to reliability of coding and stability over time. In

Attachment & Human Development Vol 2 No 1 April 2000 71–84

Correspondence to: Dr Jonathan Green, Department of Child and Family Psychiatry, BoothHall Children’s Hospital, Charlestown Road, Blackey, Manchester M9 7AA, UK. Telephone: (-)161 220 5025; fax: (-)161 220 5227. E-mail: jonathan.green@man.ac.uk

Attachment & Human Development ISSN 1461-6734 print/1469-2988 online © 2000 Taylor & Francis Ltdhttp://www.tandf.co.uk/journals

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

this paper we report on a comparison of the MCAST with other measuresthat may act as criterion referents to different aspects of the attachment con-struct that the MCAST aims to measure. There are no straightforward cri-terion referents on this area. Our strategy has been to seek to test results onthe MCAST against likely association with known instruments in the attach-ment �eld and against �ndings in the wider domain of developmentalpsychopathology. In developing the instrument we have been orientatedtowards a domain speci�c view of attachment as a construct embedded withinbroader factors within psychological development. This becomes particularlysalient in clinical applications of the instrument with children at develop-mental risk, when attachment processes and their measurement may besubject to complex confounding factors (Vondra & Barnett, 1999). This paperconsiders data from initial comparison of the MCAST with concurrentmaternal attachment representations, child representations and ratings ofchild temperament and behaviour.

The Adult Attachment Interview (AAI; George, Kaplan, & Main, 1985)and rating system (Main & Goldwyn, 1985–1994) is the standard instrumentfor assessing the adult’s generalized representation of attachment relation-ships. Maternal attachment representation assessed on the AAI has shownprediction to the pattern of mother–infant attachment developed in infancy,both in terms of security–insecurity (Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 1991) and dis-organization (van IJzendoorn, 1995; Main, 1995). The mother–child attach-ment pattern itself is usually considered as most predictive for laterattachment status in the child (Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985). Thus theconcurrent relationship between maternal AAI status and child attachmentrepresentation is an important potential test of criterion validity for an instru-ment measuring child attachment representations.

For a concurrent child variable, the child’s representation on the separ-ation anxiety test was chosen. The Separation Anxiety Test (SAT) was �rstdeveloped by Hansburg (1972) for adolescents and then adapted for 4–7-year-old children by Klagsbrun and Bowlby (1976). The test presented thechild with six hypothetical separations from parents as depicted in photo-graphs and required him or her to say how he or she would feel and suggestwhat he or she would do in such situations. Kaplan (1987), Main, Kaplan,and Cassidy (1985) and later Slough and Greenberg (1990) elaborated theoriginal design in their study of internal representational models. Kaplan(1987) identi�ed two elements in the child’s representation predicted bymother–infant secure attachment in infancy: the child’s emotional opennessand strategy for dealing with the distress of the most severe separationpicture (mother and father go away for a two-week vacation). She laterdescribed four attachment categories at age 6 years: resourceful, inactive,ambivalent, and fearful (Kaplan, 1987). Resnick (1993) elaborated the codingof the SAT for older children and adolescents in a direction more in line withthe coding of the AAI (Resnick). The SAT has been linked to infant attach-ment, concurrent reunion behaviour, pre-school adjustment and later

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 172

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

cognitive abilities in a number of studies (Shouldice and Stevenson-Hinde,1992; Jacobsen, Edelstein, & Hofmann, 1994; Main et al., 1985).

The clearest evidence of the linkage of attachment dif�culties with behav-iour problems lies in the �eld of antisocial behaviour. Van IJzendoorn (1997)reviewed evidence linking problems in such attachment relationships toemerging aggression and antisocial behaviour in the child and developed amodel linking the development of attachment relationships to the emergenceof empathy, morality and social adaptation. Lyons-Ruth (Lyons-Ruth, 1996;Lyons-Ruth, Easterbrooks, & Davidson Cibelli, 1997) has integrated attach-ment theory with other research on the development of antisocial behaviour,showing that later aggressive and antisocial behaviour is associated with non-responsive caregiving to the infant, social adversity and avoidant/disorgan-ized patterns of attachment in the toddler years. An avoidant pattern ofattachment in the absence of disorganization and social adversity was notassociated with later psychopathology (Lyons-Ruth, 1997). Main, Kaplanand Cassidy (1985) have linked the disorganized pattern of attachment ininfancy to patterns of controlling behaviour in the pre-schooler. Speltz,Greenberg, and DeKlyen (1990) found these patterns of controlling attach-ment in boys with behaviour problems of oppositional and conduct type.These observations are consistent with Patterson’s observations of coerciveinteractional cycles between parents and children in families in which thereis antisocial disorder (Patterson & Bank, 1989).

M ETHO DS

Description of the MCAST and the cohort of children and families recruitedto the study are given in the companion paper. For this aspect of the study anumber of instruments were administered alongside the child attachmenttask.

Adult attachment representation

Mothers gave separate informed consent to be interviewed on the AAI. Therewere 28 mothers in the sample who consented to the interview; given foursets of siblings, thus making 31 mother-child pairs for analysis. The inter-views were conducted by trained administrators (principally C.S. with a smallnumber by R.G.) in the parental home or in a room in a local health centre.Undertaking an AAI can be an intense experience and all participants wereoffered a follow-up session for debrie�ng if they wished. For practicalreasons, the interviews were conducted at variable times within six monthsfollowing the child assessments. AAI interviews were coded by R.G., blindto all other results, on anonymized transcripts prepared independently. Asmall number of cases where R.G. had queries regarding evidence of abuseor AAI status were checked blind by an independent coder (Dr Penny

G R E E N E T A L . : M A N C H E S T E R C H I L D AT TA C H M E N T S T O RY TA S K (2 ) 73

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Turton). One subject had to be removed (from the U-D comparison only)since signi�cant losses were not suf�ciently probed in the interview andAAI/U status could not be assured: thus the total sample was 30 pairs for thispart of the analysis.

Separation Anxiety Test

The Separation Anxiety Test (SAT) was administered by V.S. following theMCAST, using the procedure for 6-year-olds described by Slough andGreenberg (1990). Anonymized transcripts were made. V.S. was trained onthe SAT coding procedure developed by Resnick (1993) for older childrenand adolescents, which produces categorical attachment codings. This codingscheme was then modi�ed for younger children by V.S. in collaboration withGary Resnick and coded by V.S.

Behaviour and temperament

Parents completed the Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach &Edelbrock, 1981) and the EAS Child Temperament Scale (Buss and Plomin,1984). Class teachers completed the teacher report form (TRF) of the CBCL.Parental measures of temperament provide a summary attribution of behav-ioural characteristics along dimensions that have shown signi�cant levels ofheritability in behavioural genetic studies (Buss & Plomin, 1984; Plomin,1993). The EAS elicits parental evaluations of characteristic patterns of thechild’s current and past behaviour and rates these on a �ve-point scale. Analgorithm allows interviewer coding of these responses into weightings onfour categories of temperament: activity level, emotionality (characteristicsshowing intensity of emotional arousal and expression), shyness, and socia-bility.

Statistical analysis was undertaken using SPSS for Windows.

RESULTS

Comparison with concurrent maternal Adult Attachment Interview

Content analysis of the AAI showed that there was a considerable level ofadverse life-experience in the study group, considering that it was an un-selected community sample. Eight (30%) of the mothers had an AAI codingof ‘unresolved with respect to loss or trauma’ (AAI/U); three of these hadexperienced childhood abuse, two had had early losses and a further threehad had traumatic experiences or psychiatric breakdown as an adult. Twofurther mothers reported childhood abuse: but they both had autonomousAAI classi�cation and were coded as resolved with respect to the trauma.

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 174

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

One (25%) of the mothers with siblings showed an AAI/U pattern: since theoverall rate of AAI/U in the sample was 30%, this fact did not increase thelikelihood of U/D pairings in overall sample. Outcome codings from all AAItranscripts were compared with data from the MCAST codings on the relatedchildren.

Percentage agreement between three-way attachment categories on theMCAST and AAI was 61.3% (Kappa 0.08, N.S.). Agreement onsecurity/insecurity was 65.4% (Kappa = 0.18, N.S.). Yet there was a signi�-cant association between the AAI/U category and categorical D coding onthe MCAST (77% agreement Kappa = 0.493, p < 0.1) (Table 1). This � ndingwas independent of age, social circumstance or life-events. If the presence ofhigh rating on bizarreness of narrative on the MCAST was included as afurther marker of disorganization (this was coded separately from the overallD coding in the initial analysis), then the MCAST/D–AAI/U agreement isfurther increased (Kappa .585, p 0.001).

Considering the subgroup of children rated primarily disorganized on theMCAST, there is striking agreement between the child’s narrative coherencescores on this instrument and the adult’s coherence of mind scales on the AAI(0.61 p < 0.005). In the children who are not primarily disorganized on theMCAST there is no such association.

Rating against SAT scores

Ratings on the SAT showed a relatively high proportion of secure codings(secure = 82%, avoidant = 12%, ambivalent = 6%). Agreement between theSAT and MCAST overall was 80% (Table 2).

G R E E N E T A L . : M A N C H E S T E R C H I L D AT TA C H M E N T S T O RY TA S K (2 ) 75

Table 1 Association between AAI U and MCAST D

MCAST MCASTD code Non-D

AAI – U code 7 2AAI – Non-U 5 16

Note: agreement = 77% Kappa = 0.493 p < 0.01

Table 2 Association between attachment security on MCAST and SAT

SAT SATSecure Insecure

MCAST Secure 23 2MCAST Insecure 5 4

Note: Kappa = 0.41, p < 0.01

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Correlation with parental ratings of child temperament

Parental ratings on the EAS Temperament questionnaire were compared withkey outcomes from the MCAST. Ratings are made on the MCAST regard-ing the child’s initial engagement with the task as the story-stem is introducedand the pattern of the child’s arousal as the emotional content of the stem israised (see appendix). There is a signi�cant association between these ratingsand the temperament measures (Table 3). Poor scores on initial task engage-ment on the MCAST correlate with high temperamental ‘emotionality’ (r = –0.36, p = 0.048), and ‘activity’ (r = –0.38, p = 0.04). A poor ability tohandle the initial arousal presented in the initiation of the story-stem corre-lates with high temperamental ‘emotionality’ (r = –0.38, p = 0.038) and ‘activ-ity’ (r = –0.37 p = 0.046).

On the other hand the temperamental measures do not correlate withcodings in the MCAST speci�cally relating to attachment behaviour or dis-organization (Table 3). Using one-way analysis of variance, there was also noevidence that temperament measures varied signi�cantly with overall attach-ment security vs. insecurity (for shyness, F < 1, N.S.; for sociability, F < .1,N.S.; for emotionality, F = 1.22, NS; for activity, F = 3.7224, p < .10).

Correlation with independent behavioural ratings

Interview codings were considered in relation to independent behaviouralratings (parent- and teacher-rated CBCL scores). Disorganization on theMCAST shows correlation with teacher reports of overall behavioural prob-lems (Table 3). Within the CBCL subscales of these behaviour problems, dis-organization correlates with high teacher ratings in areas of social problems(r = .39, p < .01) and attentional problems (r = .43, p < .005). There is littlecorrelation, however, between disorganization and parental ratings of behav-iour problems.

By contrast, within this population there was no evidence that overallratings of behaviour varied signi�cantly with attachment security/insecurity(one-way ANOVA for teacher total score, F < 1, N.S.; for parent total score,F = 2.02, N.S.). Parent rating for internalizing problems and for anxiety anddepression did show variance with security (for internalizing problems, F =7.2, p < .01; for anxiety and depression, F = 4.7, p < .05) but in an apparentlyparadoxical way: higher scores on internalizing problems are associated withattachment security. There was no such effect for the CBCL externalizingscales.

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 176

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

G R E E N E T A L . : M A N C H E S T E R C H I L D AT TA C H M E N T S T O RY TA S K (2 ) 77

Tabl

e 3

Cor

rela

tions

bet

wee

n M

CA

ST v

aria

bles

, par

ent-

repo

rted

tem

pera

men

tal t

rait

s (E

AS

scal

e), a

nd b

ehav

iour

al s

core

s (C

BC

L) (

Spea

r-m

an r

)

Act

Em

otSh

ySo

cia

tts

tis

tes

pts

pis

pes

(n=3

0)(n

=30

)(n

=30

)(n

=30)

(n=5

0)(n

=50

)(n

=50)

(n=

36)

(n=

37)

(n=

36)

Nar

rati

ve c

oher

ence

–.3

–.16

.11

–.10

–.20

–.35

**–.

14.2

3.3

8**

.1D

isor

gani

zati

on s

core

.35

.17

–.07

.16

.45*

*.3

7**

.29

–.17

–.37

**.1

2M

enta

lizin

g sc

ore

–.06

–.02

–.14

.17

.06

–.12

.06

.15

.23

.21

Initi

al e

ngag

emen

t–.

38*

–.36

*.0

9–.

13–.

30*

–.37

**–.

22.1

4.2

6.0

6In

itia

l aro

usal

–.37

*–.

38*

.08

–.02

–.32

**.3

2*–.

29.1

9.3

1.1

5

Not

e : *

p <

.05,

**

p <

.01:

(2-t

aile

d te

sts)

Key

: Te

mpe

ram

ent s

core

s : A

ct =

Act

ivity

, Em

ot =

Em

otio

nalit

y, S

hy =

Shy

ness

, Soc

ial =

Soc

iabi

lity

Hig

h sc

ores

indi

cate

mor

e of

the

trai

t.Te

ache

r C

BC

L (t

otal

scor

es) :

tts

= ov

eral

l sco

re, t

is =

inte

rnal

izin

g be

havi

ours

, tes

= ex

tern

aliz

ing

beha

viou

rs.

Par

enta

l CB

CL

(tot

al sc

ores

) :pt

s =

over

all s

core

, pis

= in

tern

aliz

ing

beha

viou

r, pe

s =

exte

rnal

izin

g be

havi

our.

MC

AST

scor

es:

Nar

rativ

e co

here

nce,

men

taliz

ing,

aro

usal

, eng

agem

ent;

low

sco

res

rela

te to

gre

ater

abn

orm

ality

.D

isor

gani

zatio

n: h

igh

scor

e in

dica

tes

grea

ter

diso

rgan

izat

ion.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

DISCUSSION

There is no single ideal ‘anchor’ to act as a criterion referent for the MCASTcodings. Other studies of similar instruments at 6 years have used linkagewith reunion behaviour (Shouldice & Stevenson-Hinde, 1992; Main, Kaplan,& Cassidy, 1985; Solomon, George & De Jong, 1995) and linkage with infantattachment classi�cation. The design of this study aimed to compare theinstrument on a number of measures which could act as an referent for differ-ent aspects of the attachment construct.

Linkage between the ‘unresolved’ category on the AAI and disorganizedattachment patterns in infancy is a well-replicated �nding (van IJzendoorn,1995; Main, 1995). In this study a signi�cant relationship is found betweenprimary disorganization in the MCAST in the early school years and unre-solved status on concurrent maternal AAI. Given the strength of the inter-generational linkage from mothers to infants and the clinical importance ofboth disorganized attachments in childhood and unresolved status in parents,this is likely to be a �nding with potential future implications that will needreplication in other samples. Only the mother–child relationship wasaddressed in this study and the �ndings cannot necessarily be generalized tothe father–child relationship: patterns of attachment relationship with fathersare found to be relatively independent from those with mothers in infancy(Fox, Kimmerly, & Schafer, 1991) and in the pre-school period (Verschueren& Marcoen, 1999). The MCAST has not yet been systematically applied tothe father–child relationship although in principle this is easy to do by sub-stitution of a father doll for a mother doll. Such work remains to be under-taken.

The �nding of the striking intergenerational linkage of coherence of mindin the disorganized/unresolved dyads is intriguing. This result could be inter-preted as an artefact due to the strong effect of disorganization phenomenaon coherence scoring in both instruments. But the result could equallysuggest something rather speci�c about the attunment (or enmeshment) ofmental states in the disorganized/unresolved dyads. More detailed contentanalysis of MCAST and AAI themes in these dyads (Goldwyn, Stanley,Smith & Green, 1999) tends to support this view, �nding speci�c echoesbetween the psychological themes presented in the AAI of the mothers andthe themes represented in the MCAST. The presence of diffuse or unclearpsychological boundaries between parent and child in disturbed relationshipsis a �nding commonly reported in the clinical literature. Other potentialmediating or modifying effects from parental mental state on the MCASTratings such as parental depression, expressed emotion or attributions wouldbe important to study, and this is the subject of current ongoing work withthe instrument.

In contrast to these �ndings on disorganization, there was poor agreementbetween the equivalent categorical attachment codings on each instrumentand on security vs. insecurity. This is out of keeping with studies that have

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 178

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

linked maternal AAI codings to infant attachment patterns (e.g. Fonagy,Steele, & Steele, 1991; van IJzendoorn, 1995) or to reunion behaviour at age6 years, George & Solomon (1996) and Ammaniti, Speranza and Candelori(1996). The distribution of categories in our sample showed a high propor-tion of secure representations – and it is possible that further studies withmore balanced samples may shed more light on the relationship between� ndings on these two instruments. There is at present a dearth of comparable� ndings, linking concurrent maternal AAI with doll play representations inthe early school years, although Gloger-Tippelt has recently (1998) reportedan association on two-way analysis between concurrent AAI and a doll-storytask at 6 years.

The Separation Anxiety Test has been used as a measure of attachmentsecurity for many years. Compared with the MCAST it uses a differentmedium (pictures) and stimulus (a separation in which proximity-seekingattachment behaviour is rendered impossible by the parents’ absence).Furthermore the rating is made predominantly from the child’s verbalresponses, which in this age group can be sparse. In this study the ResnickSAT coding used is reported because its outcome codings were the mostsimilar to the AAI in their categorical nature; however, the coding schemehad to be adapted slightly for younger children. These differences in method-ology may militate against high correlations between results on the differentinstruments. Furthermore, for practical reasons, the SAT interviews had tobe completed following the MCAST in the same session, allowing the possi-bility that SAT responses may have been in�uenced by the previous inter-view, Mary Main, personal communication. Agreement between secure andinsecure classi�cation on the MCAST and the SAT is signi�cant but showsonly moderate Kappa. This is partly accounted for by the relatively skeweddistribution of high security in the sample studied. Further studies of dis-advantaged groups – as with the AAI – may show up better the pattern ofassociation. Meanwhile there is some but certainly not de�nitive support forthe notion that the phenomena elicited in this interview and on the SAT arethe same; future work will explore another SAT coding system (Kaplan 1987)and the predictive validity of the instrument.

There has been much debate on the potential relationship of temperamen-tal traits to attachment behaviours. Previous research in relation to theStrange Situation procedure has suggested that temperamental measures mayeffect the style of the child’s response to the stress of separation (e.g. Thomp-son, Connell, & Bridges, 1988); whether there is overall a confounding effectof temperament on attachment classi�cation is less clear (Vaughn & Bost,1999). The initial results on this instrument suggest that temperamentaldifferences are re�ected in the initial orientation of the child to the task andin the response to the initial arousal stimulus, but not to the detailed contentof the story completions themselves. Traits of high activity levels and intensearousal are related to poorer initial engagement with the story task. Childrenwith high arousal on the EAS also react in a less integrated way to the arousal

G R E E N E T A L . : M A N C H E S T E R C H I L D AT TA C H M E N T S T O RY TA S K (2 ) 79

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

stimulus of the story. However, the actual pattern of the story completionsthemselves and the attachment ratings derived from them is not associatedwith these temperamental traits. These �ndings provide at least preliminarysupport for the view that the MCAST procedure is measuring somethingother than generic behavioural traits and that attachment codings are notmerely a redescription of traits such as sociability.

The findings in relation to behavioural ratings need to be initially quali-fied by two factors. First, this was a normative community rather than aclinical sample; and second the behaviour measures used are designed forepidemiological use on such samples rather than being more intensive clini-cal assessments. The results, however, do show however an association inthis population between high ratings for disorganization on the MCASTand children who are rated by teachers as disturbed in their thinking andbehaviour. The finding is consistent with other research into the linkagebetween disorganized/controlling attachments and behavioural disturbance(Lyons-Ruth, Easterbrooks & Davidson Cibelli, 1997; Speltz, Greenberg &DeKlyen, 1990; Van IJzendoorn, 1997). Lyons-Ruth has reported theassociation between early attachment disorganization and later emergenceof antisocial behaviour at 5 years. Speltz et al. have reported similar find-ings in boys with clinical oppositional defiant disorders. The findings inrelation to parental ratings on the other hand seem at first sight paradoxi-cal, with higher ratings of internalizing problems reported in secure asagainst insecure children. However, similar findings to this have beenreported previously. Stevenson-Hinde and Shouldice (1990) found that themothers of children aged 2.5 years, previously rated secure in the StrangeSituation, rated them significantly lower on security using an attachment Qsort than did the observers, whereas the mothers of avoidant childrentended to rate them as more secure than did observers. They suggest thatmothers of securely attached children may be particularly sensitive to thechildren’s experience and mental state and thus tend to over-representemotional symptomatology or insecurity. This would be in keeping withthe result that these same children are not rated as having high internaliz-ing scores by teachers. A rather different explanation for at least some ofthese cases, however, may be suggested by the recent findings of Radke-Yarrow (1998) regarding children of depressed mothers. Radke-Yarrowreports in this group an association between secure attachment to thedepressed mother in early childhood and later emotional symptoms in thechildren. The hypothesis proposed to explain these findings is that the chil-dren of depressed mothers may be made more vulnerable to emotionalsymptoms by the closeness of the secure relationship and consequent vul-nerability to maternal mood states. In this study we had no measure ofmaternal mood and it is not possible to test this hypothesis which suggeststhat there are likely to be complex patterns of relationship between attach-ment security and psychological vulnerability in specific situations.

The further study of the MCAST procedure in clinical groups is under way

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 180

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

and promises to allow the analysis of detailed concurrent attachment rep-resentations in children with a variety of clinical problems. It will be neces-sary to test in this further research whether the association found herebetween attachment disorganization and disturbed behaviour is present inthe clinical population and whether it may be confounded by any othervariables such as developmental impairments in executive functioning, atten-tion or language.

ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS

The authors record appreciation for the helpful comments of Dr MattWoolgar and anonymous reviewers on early drafts of this paper. Dr PennyTurton gave generous assistance in rating some of the AAI transcripts foraccuracy. We are very grateful to the families who participated in the studyand to the staff of the infant school and health centre for their co-operation.Hilary Hood did invaluable work on data entry and on AAI and SAT tran-scription. Gary Resnick gave generous advice on the SAT coding and Pro-fessor Graham Dunn from the University of Manchester gave invaluablestatistical advice.

REFER ENCES

Achenbach, T. M., & Edlebrock, C. S. (1981). Behavioural problems and competen-cies reported by parents of normal and disturbed children age 4 through 16.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46 (1, Serial No.188).

Ammaniti, M., Speranza, A. M., & Candelori, C. (1996). Stability of attachment inchildren and intergenerational transmission of attachment. Psychiatria dell’Infanzia e dell’Adolscenza, 63, 313–332.

Buss, A. H., & Plomin, R. (1984). Temperament: Early developing personality traits.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Fonagy, P., Steele, H., & Steele, M. (1991). Maternal representations of attachmentduring pregnancy predict the organisation of infant mother attachment and 1year of age. Child Development, 62, 891–905.

Fox, N. A., Kimmerly, N. L., & Schafer, W. D. (1991). Attachment to mother/attach-ment to father: a meta-analysis. Child Development, 62, 210–225.

George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). The Adult Attachment Interview.Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, University of California atLos Angeles, Berkeley.

George, C., & Solomon, J. (1996). Representational models of relationships: Linksbetween caregiving and attachment. Infant Mental Health Journal, 17, 198–216.

Gloger-Tippelt, G. (July 1998) The relation between six year old attachment represen-tations, mothers’ AAIs and quality of attachment in infancy. Paper presented atthe 15th biennial meeting of the International Society for the Study of Behav-ioural Development. Berne.

G R E E N E T A L . : M A N C H E S T E R C H I L D AT TA C H M E N T S T O RY TA S K (2 ) 81

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Goldwyn, R., Stanley, C., Smith, V., & Green, J., (1999). Disorganised attachmentrepresentation at 5–7 years: Association with concurrent parental unresolved lossand trauma. Paper presented at the 11th International Congress of the EuropeanSociety for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, September, Hamburg, Germany.

Hansburg, H. G. (1972). Adolescent Separation Anxiety. Spring�eld, IL: CharlesThomas.

Jacobsen, T., Edelstein, W., & Hofmann, V. (1994). A longitudinal study of the relationbetween representations of attachment in childhood and cognitive functioning inchildhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 30, 1, 112–114.

Kaplan, N. (1987). Individual differences in six-year-olds’ thought about separation:Predicted from attachment to mother at age one year. Unpublished doctoraldissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Klagsbrun, M., & Bowlby, J. (1976). Responses to separation from parents: A clinicaltest for young children. British Journal of Projective Psychology, 21, 7–27.

Lyons-Ruth, K. (1996). Attachment relationships among children with aggressivebehavior problems: The role of disorganized early attachment patterns. Journalof Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1, 64–73.

Lyons-Ruth, K., Easterbrooks, M. A., & Davidson Cibelli, C. (1997). Infant attach-ment strategies, infant mental lag, and maternal depressive symptoms: predictorsof internalizing and externalizing problems at age 7. Developmental Psychology,33, 4, 681–692.

Main, M. (1995). Recent studies in attachment: Overview, with selected implicationsfor clinical work. In S. Goldberg, R. Muir, & J. Kerr (Eds), Attachment theory:social, developmental, and clinical perspectives. Hillsdale: Analytic Press.

Main, M., & Goldwyn, R. (1985–1994). Adult Attachment Scoring and Classi�cationSystem. Unpublished scoring manual. Department of Psychology, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley.

Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, childhood andadulthood: A move to the level of representation. Monographs of the Society forResearch in Child Development, 50, 66–104.

Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disorientated during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M. T. Greenberg, D.Cicchetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds), Attachment in the preschool years: Theory,research and intervention (pp. 121–160). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Patterson, G. R., & Bank, L. (1989). Some amplifying mechanisms for pathologicprocesses in families. In M. R. Funnar & E. Thelen (Eds), Systems and develop-ment: The Minnesota symposia on child psychology (Vol. 22, pp. 16–20). Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum.

Plomin, R. (1993). Nature and nurture: Perspective and prospective. In R. Plomin &G. E. McLean (Eds), Nature, nurture, and psychology (pp. 459–485). Washing-ton, DC: American Psychological Association.

Radke-Yarrow, M. (1998). Children of depressed mothers: From early childhood tomaturity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Resnick, G. (1993). Measuring attachment in early adolescence: A manual for theadministration, coding and interpretation of the SAT for 11 to 14 year olds.Rockville, MD: Westat.

Shouldice, A., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1992). Coping with security distress: TheSeparation Anxiety Test and attachment classi�cation at 4.5 years. Journal ofChild Psychiatry, 33, 2, 331–348.

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 182

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Slough, N. M., & Greenberg, M. T. (1990). Five year olds’ representations of separ-ation from parents: Responses from the perspective of self and other. New Direc-tions for Child Development, 48, 67–84. (University of Washington).

Solomon, J., George, C., & De Jong, A. (1995). Children classi�ed as controlling atage six: Evidence of disorganised representational strategies and aggression athome and at school. Development and Psychopathology, 7, 447–463.

Speltz, M. L., Greenberg, M. T., & DeKlyen, M. (1990). Attachment in preschoolerswith disruptive behaviour: A comparison of clinic-referred and non-problemchildren. Development and Psychopathology, 2, 31–46.

Stevenson-Hinde, J. and Shouldice, A. (1990). Fear and attachment in 2.5 year olds.British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8, 319–333.

Thompson, R. A., Connell, J. P., & Bridges, L. J. (1988). Temperament emotion andsocial interactive behaviour in the Strange Situation: A component processanalysis of attachment system functioning. Child Development, 59, 1102–1110.

van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1995). Adult attachment representations, parental respon-siveness and infant attachment: A meta-analysis on the predictive validity of theAdult Attachment Interview. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 387–493.

van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Attachment, emergent morality and aggression:Towards a developmental socioemotional model of antisocial behaviour. Inter-national Journal of Behavioural Development, 21, 4, 703–727.

Vaughn, B. E., & Bost, K. K. (1999). Attachment and temperament. Redundant, inde-pendent, or interacting in� uences on interpersonal adaptation and personalitydevelopment? In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds), Handbook of attachment: Theory,research and clinical applications (Chapter 10). New York: Guilford Press.

Verschueren, K., & Marcoen, A. (1999). Representations of self and socioemotionalcompetence in kindergartners: Differential and combined effects of attachmentto mother and to father. Child Development, 70, 183–201.

Vondra, J. I., & Barnett, D. (1999). Atypical attachment in infancy and early childhoodamong children at developmental risk. Monographs of the Society for Research inChild Development, 64 (3, Serial No. 258).

APPENDIX: EXTRACT FROM THE CODINGM ANUAL OF THE M CAST RELATING TO

M EASUR ES OF ENGAGEMENT AND AROUSALIN THE INITIATION PHASE

(Full details of the coding manual are available from the corresponding author.)

Engagement in initial phase of the interview

A rating of the extent to which the child has got absorbed and imaginatively caught upin the story. Rate by increasing attention to the play materials and the story, lack of dis-traction to other things, quality of emotional engagement in the story as seen by facialexpression, gesture, comments, etc. Good engagement with the examiner shown bysocial referencing, etc., also weights here. Code on behaviour up until the handover ofinitiative to the child. Dif�culties with the handover and turn-taking do not code here.

G R E E N E T A L . : M A N C H E S T E R C H I L D AT TA C H M E N T S T O RY TA S K (2 ) 83

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

1 Impossible to engage. Either overactive, distractible and unable to focus orextremely passive.

23 Examiner has to work much harder than usual but still cannot develop the child’s

engagement successfully.45 Good enough to proceed to the next phase but still somewhat problematic and

examiner has to work quite hard to initiate/maintain engagement. Below 5 the raterwill not be able to proceed with the interview. Above 5 the interview can proceed.

67 Good-quality engagement by the end. Examiner has to work only slightly to main-

tain engagement.89 High-quality full engagement from the beginning. Immediate engagement with

play materials and intense active interest in the story. Deepening concentration asvignette proceeds.

QUALITY OF AROUSAL DURING THEINITIATION PHASE

We expect a gradual increase in arousal as the initiation of the vignette proceeds. Thisrating records how easily the child is able to experience this increased arousal.

1 No capacity appropriately to modulate arousal in the context. Either an absence ofany arousal at all or a chaotic and unfocused overarousal, which is not modulatedand is incongruous to the context of the vignette.

23 Partial or very uneven modulation. Dif�cult to contain and fairly incongruous with

vignette. Paradoxical response with decreasing apparent arousal during engage-ment. Children with ratings of 3 or below will be unable to tolerate the arousalgenerated in this phase of the interview. They may show behaviour such as com-pletely turning away, leaving the table, clapping hands over head.

45 An uneven modulation but a gradual and reasonably appropriate increase in arousal

during the initiation phase. Turning away of the body but not leaving the table.Brie�y putting hands over ears.

67 Quite appropriate modulation of increasing arousal. Quite well contained and

appropriate. Examples of the behaviour here would be the presence of an embar-rassed laugh or inappropriate ‘forced’ smiling.

89 Fluently modulated, graduate increase in arousal as initiation phase continues. Sen-

sitive and appropriate to the context introduced by the examiner. Well containedand appropriate to the setting and task. Enables the child effectively to engage inplay.

AT TA C H M E N T & H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T VOL. 2 NO. 184

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

34 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014