Predictive Implications of Individual Differences in Attachment

Abstract

The "strange situation" is widely used as a procedure for assessing individual differences in the quality of infant-parent attachments. Strange-situation behavior is believed to reflect individual differences in the quality of early parental behavior. The popularity of the procedure rests, in part, on claims concerning the association between strange-situation behavior around 12–20 months of age and subsequent child performance. It is shown here that the empirical support for these claims is quite weak and inconsistent. Studies have been designed in such a way that causal inferences about the direction and nature of effects have been precluded. Furthermore, associations have been found only when the quality of care received (whether good or poor) was likely to have been stable, thus precluding inferences about the formative significance of early (as opposed to contemporaneous) parent-child interaction.

Full text

Journal
of
Consulting
and
Clinical
Psychology
1987,
Vol.
55,
No.
6,817-824
Copyright
1987
by the
American
Psychological
Association, Inc.
0022-006X/87/S00.75
Predictive
Implications
of
Individual
Differences
in
Attachment
Michael
E.
Lamb
National
Institute
of
Child
Health
and
Human
Development
The
"strange
situation"
is
widely
used
as a
procedure
for
assessing
individual
differences
in the
quality
of
infant-parent
attachments.
Strange-situation
behavior
is
believed
to
reflect
individual
differences
in the
quality
of
early
parental
behavior.
The
popularity
of the
procedure
rests,
in
part,
on
claims
concerning
the
association
between
strange-situation
behavior
around
12-20
months
of
age
and
subsequent
child
performance.
It
is
shown
here
that
the
empirical
support
for
these
claims
is
quite
weak
and
inconsistent.
Studies
have
been
designed
in
such
a
way
that
causal
i
n
ferences
about
the
direction
and
nature
of
effects
have
been
precluded.
Furthermore,
associations
have
been
found
only
when
the
quality
of
care
received
(whether
good
or
poor)
was
likely
to
have
been
stable,
thus
precluding
inferences
about
the
formative
significance
of
early
(as
opposed
to
contemporaneous)
parent-child
interaction.
Students
of
personality development
have
long believed that
early
experiences within
the
family
have
a
major impact
on
sub-
sequent development,
but
until
the
1960s,
there
was
little agree-
ment about
the
mechanisms whereby these
influences
were
me-
diated.
Since 1958,
however,
Bowlby's
attachment
theory
has
provided
a
means
of
understanding attachment
in
such
a way
that
the
origins
of
individual
differences,
as
well
as
their
im-
plications,
can be
conceptualized
and
studied. This article
is
focused
on
attempts
to
demonstrate
the
predictive impact
of
individual
differences
in
attachment.
Stimulated
by
Harlow's
(1958; Harlow
&
Zimmerman,
1959)
research
and by the
maternal deprivation literature
Bowlby,
1951),
Bowlby
(1958,
1969) concluded that humans
have
an
innate need
for
social
interaction that might
best
be
satisfied
by the
attainment
of
physical contact with
an
adult.
Bowlby
suggested
that
it
was
of
survival
value
for
human
infants
to
seek
the
protective proximity
of
adults
and
that they should
have
acquired,
as a
result
of
selection pressures,
a
repertoire
of
behaviors
that
are
useful
in
attaining proximity, including such
signals
as
smiles
and
cries
(Frodi,
Lamb,
Leavitt,
&
Donovan,
1978).
Because
the
efficacy
of
such proximity/contact promot-
ing
signals depends
on the
appropriateness
and
promptness
of
the
adult's
response,
mutual responsiveness
and
interaction
be-
come critical
in
humans:
Infants,
Bowlby
proposed,
become
at-
tached
to
individuals
who
consistently
and
appropriately
re-
spond
to
proximity-promoting signals
and
behaviors.
Bowlby
further
drew
on
control systems theory
to
describe
the
dynam-
ics of
proximity-seeking behavior.
He
suggested that
the
degree
This
article
draws
on a
lengthier
review
completed
in
cooperation
with
Ross
Thompson,
Bill
Gardner,
and
Eric
Charnov
(Lamb,
Thomp-
son,
Gardner,
&
Charnov,
1985).
I am
happy
to
acknowledge
the
assis-
tance
of
these
colleagues,
and I refer readers to our
book
for a
more
detailed
discussion
of
the
issues
and
studies
reviewed
here.
Correspondence
concerning
this
article
should
be
addressed
to Mi-
chael
E.
Lamb,
Section
on
Social
and
Emotional
Development,
Labora-
tory
of
Comparative
Ethology,
National
Institute
of
Child
Health
and
Human
Development,
Third
Floor—BSA
Building,
9190
Rockville
Pike,
Bethesda,
Maryland
20814.
of
proximity/contact sought
by an
infant—the
"set
goal"—
would
vary
over time depending
on
both exogenous (e.g.,
famil-
iarity
of the
surroundings)
and
endogeneous (e.g., illness,
fa-
tigue)
factors.
By the
second
half-year
of
life,
each
infant
was
believed
to
engage
in
repeated appraisals, comparing
the
per-
ceived
need
for
proximity/contact (i.e.,
the set
goal) with
the
infant's
actual location relative
to the
attachment
figure and ad-
justing
the set
goal accordingly
to
ensure adequate degrees
of
"felt
security."
In
terms
of
attachment theory,
infant
behavior
is
adapted
to
complement that
of a
parent
who
responds contingently
and
appropriately
to
infant
signals,
but
when
the
adult's
behavior
departs
markedly
and
consistently
from
the
evolutionary norm,
much
of the
infant's
proximity promoting
and
maintaining
rep-
ertoire
may
become
ineffective,
with adverse
effects
on the
ap-
praisal
processes
underlying
the
control system. Furthermore,
Bowlby
(1969,
1973) proposed that
infants
construct internal
working
models
of
their attachment
figures
that constitute
rep-
resentations
of the
adult's
pertinent
attributes—especially
his
or her
accessibility
and
responsiveness. These
working
models
of
the
parents
are
believed
to
affect
the
control system just
as
fatigue
or
novelty
do.
Because
the
basic
function
of
the
attachment
system
is to
pro-
mote protective proximity
to an
adult
in the
face
of
threat
or
alarm
and to
promote exploration
in the
absence
of
threat,
the
"strange
situation"
was
designed
by
Ainsworth
and
Wittig
(1969)
to
create gradually escalating
stress
for the
baby
so
that
consequent changes
in
infant
behavior toward
the
parent
could
be
observed.
The
assumption
was
that variations
in the
security
of
attachment,
and in the
working models that underlie them,
would
be
most clearly evident
in
stressful
circumstances,
and
the
procedure thus involves
the
introduction
of a
stranger
and
two
brief separations
from
and
reunions with
the
parent.
On
the
basis
of
their behavior (particularly
in the
reunion
episodes),
infants
are
then
classified
into
one of
three groups
(A, B, C) and
8
subgroups
(Al,
A2,
Bl,
B2, B3,
B4,
Cl,
C2).
The
Group
B
infants
are
considered securely attached because they greet
the
parent upon reunion
(by
seeking
proximity/contact
or by
distal
bids)
and use the
parent
as a
secure base
from
which
to
explore,
817

818
MICHAEL
E.
LAMB
thus
behaving
in the
evolutionarily
adaptive
pattern
described
by
Bowlby.
The
Group
A and
Group
C
infants
are
called inse-
cure
because their behavior deviates
from
this
pattern,
thereby
revealing
distorted
or
confused
working
models. Some insecure
infants
are
called
avoidant
(A)
because they tend
to
avoid
or
ignore their parents rather than
to
seek
interaction,
especially
upon reunion.
The
Group
C
infants
are
called
resistant
because
they
mingle proximity-
or
contact-seeking behaviors
with
angry
rejecting
behavior.
Since
its
development
in
1962,
the
strange-situation
proce-
dure
has
attained popularity
as a
means
of
assessing infant-
adult
attachments.
In
part,
this
popularity
rests
on
claims con-
cerning
the
associations
between patterns
of
prior
parent-in-
fant
interaction
and
subsequent strange-situation behavior (e.g.,
Ainsworth,
Blehar, Waters,
&
Wall,
1978).
In
this
special
series,
Goldsmith
and
Alansky
(1987) report
the
results
of a
meta-
analysis
that
confirm
an
association
between maternal
respon-
siveness
and
later behavior
in the
strange situation,
but
their
emphasis
on the
weakness
of the
relation
and on
other method-
ological
problems
mirrors
the
conclusion reached
by
Lamb,
Thompson,
Gardner,
and
Charnov
(1985)
following
a
narrative
review
of the
literature.
The
popularity
of the
procedure
has
also
been enhanced
by
claims that
strange-situation
behavior
predicts important aspects
of the
child's
behavior
as
much
as
several
years later. Because
few
assessments
in
infancy
have
im-
pressive
predictive validity, these claims
have
understandably
excited
developmentalists.
Unfortunately,
research
on
this topic
is not
without
its
prob-
lems
(Lamb
et
al.,
1985). Most researchers
have
examined
many
dependent measures
yet
have
paid scant attention
to the
measures
that
fail
to
exhibit
the
predicted
effects.
Furthermore,
investigators
have
implicitly
tested
the
rather
imprecise
hypoth-
esis that Group
B
behavior presages
better
performance
and ad-
justment
(broadly
denned)
than does Group
A or
Group
C be-
havior.
Although
theorists
like
Sroufe
(1978, 1983)
have
ac-
knowledged
that
major
disruptions
in the
child's
environment
may
affect
the
continuity
of
behavioral organization, their
em-
phasis
has
been
on the
self-perpetuating endogenous
processes
by
which
earlier patterns
are
maintained
and
consolidated.
As
Ainsworth
et al.
(1978,
p.
290) wrote: "Individual
differences
in
quality
of
attachment
of
infant
to
mother thus
appear
to be
strikingly
stable over
a
relatively long period
of
time
and
despite
the
possibility
of
occurrence
of
life
events that might have inter-
vened
to
change
the
attachment relationship
in
some
cases."
In
this
article,
I
briefly
review
research
on the
predictive
im-
plications
of
individual
differences
in
attachment
and
highlight
three
deficiencies
with
the
available
evidence.'
First,
the
associ-
ation between strange-situation behavior
and
subsequent
child
performance
has
been quite weak
and
inconsistent. Second,
as-
sociations
have
been obtained almost
exclusively
in
studies
wherein
stability
in
caretaking
circumstances (good
or
bad)
has
obtained.
As a
result,
it is not
reasonable
to
attribute
later
differences
in
child performance
to
earlier
patterns
of
parent-
child interaction:
Differences
in
child behavior
can
just
as
plau-
sibly
be
attributed
to
contemporaneous
patterns
of
parent-
child
interaction.
Third,
the
studies
have been designed
in
such
a way
that
attachment
has
been
assessed
only
at
Time
1 and
outcomes
only
at
Time
2, and
thus,
the
associations
cannot
be
interpreted
unambiguously:
Unless
we
assess
both constructs
at
both
ages,
we
cannot
conclude
that
differences
in
attachment
produce
differences
in the
constructs
assessed
later.
Intra-
and
interpersonal harmony
may
simply
go
together.
Minneapolis
Middle-Class
Sample
Matas,
Arend,
and
Sroufe
(1978)
related security
of
attach-
ment
at
18
months
to
measures
of the
child's
and
mother's
be-
havior
at 24
months
in
play,
problem-solving,
and
clean-up situ-
ations
in a
sample
of
middle-income
families.
The
Group
B
infants
engaged
in
more symbolic
play
than both avoidant
and
resistant
infants.
In the
problem-solving situation,
the
Group
B
infants were more
enthusiastic
and
compliant than
the
non-
Group-B
infants.
They
also
ignored their mothers less;
exhib-
ited
fewer
frustration behaviors; showed more positive
affect;
and
engaged
in
less negativism,
crying/whining,
aggression
to-
ward
mother,
and
negative
affect.
Arend, Gove,
and
Sroufe
(1979)
relocated
26 of
these chil-
dren
when
they
were
5
years
of
age. Both their teachers'
Q-sort
ratings
(Block
&
Block,
1980)
and
laboratory measures showed
the
Group
B
children
to be
more
ego
resilient than
the
Group
A
and
Group
C
children.
The
resistant
(Group
C)
infants
were
high
on ego
undercontrol
and the
avoidant
infants
were
low;
the
Group
B
infants
fell
in
between,
with
a
mean score close
to
that
of
the
Group
C
children. Three additional measures
of
curios-
ity
all
showed
the
Group
B
children
to be
more
curious.
Inter-
pretation
of the
differences
is
problematic,
however,
because
this
was a
select,
stable
middle-class
sample,
and
Arend
et al.
candidly
discussed
how
continuity
in
patterns
of
care
might
affect
the
predictive utility
of
attachment
classifications.
Minneapolis
Study
of
Disadvantaged
Families
Sroufe
and
Egeland
subsequently undertook
a
longitudinal
study
of 267
low-income
primiparae
and
their
infants.
In a
study
of
dyadic peer interaction
at
20-23
months, Pastor
(1980,
1981)
included only those children
who had
obtained
the
same
attachment
classification
at
both
12
and
18
months. Four
of six
ratings
and 9 of 28
discrete behavior measures revealed
signifi-
cant
differences
between some
or all of the
groups,
with
the
Group
B
infants
more sociable, more compliant,
and
better
supported
by
their mothers.
Later, Sroufe
and
Rosenberg
(1982)
attempted
to
replicate
Matas
et
al.'s
(1978)
findings
using subjects
from
this
sample.
The
tenor
of the
results
they
obtained using
18-month
classifi-
cations
matched Matas
et
al.'s
findings,
although there
were
few
specific
replications.
However,
only three measures distin-
guished
24-month-old
infants
who
fell
in
Group
B
from
those
in the
other groups
at
12
months.
Presumably,
this
was
because
many
of
these subjects experienced changes
in
attachment sta-
tus
between
12and
18
months
(Vaughn,
Egeland,
Sroufe,
&
Wa-
ters,
1979);
when
attachments were stable between
12
and
18
months,
prediction
from
12
to 24
months
was
increased.
Evi-
dently,
attachment classifications
may
have
substantial predic-
tive
validity
only
when
there
is
continuity
in the
quality
of
care
or
in
strange-situation behavior. This conclusion
was
reinforced
'
Readers
are
referred
to the
volume
by
Lamb
et al.
(1985)
for
a
more
thorough
and
detailed
discussion.

SPECIAL
SERIES:
INDIVIDUAL
DIFFERENCES
IN
ATTACHMENT
819
by
Erickson
and
Crichton
(1981)
in
another analysis
of
these
data.
At
42
months
of
age,
children
who
were classified
in
Groups
A
and B at
both
12
and
IS
months
of age
were
significantly
more
persistent, enthusiastic,
and
compliant
but
relied less
on
mother
for
support
than those
classified
in
Group
C
(Erickson
&
Farber,
1983).
There
were
no
significant
differences
between
Groups
A and B and no
group
differences
on
measures
of
nega-
tivism,
affection,
avoidance
of
mother,
or
the
child's
overall
ex-
perience
of the
session.
Forty
of
the
subjects
who had
stable attachment patterns par-
ticipated
in a
special
nursery school program
when
they
were
4-5
years
of age
(Sroufe,
1979, 1983; Sroufe, Fox,
&
Pancake,
1983).
The
Group
B
infants
spent less time sitting near
the
teachers
and
scored higher
on ego
resiliency
and
self-esteem
Q
sorts,
teacher ratings
of
agency,
positive
affect,
and
composite
measures
of
positive
and
negative behaviors
and
scored lower
on
negative
affect
and
dependency.
The
Group
B
infants
were
also ranked higher
in
social competence, number
of
friends,
popularity
(on
sociometric
instruments), social
skills,
compli-
ance,
and
empathy.
In
a
later
report
concerning
this
subsample,
LaFreniere
and
Sroufe
(1985)
focused
on
peer interaction
in the
preschool.
Group
B
versus
Group
A
plus Group
C
differences
emerged
on
two
measures: teacher ratings
of
social competence
and
socio-
metric status.
Group
B
children displayed
fewer
negative
ex-
pressions than Group
A
children, whereas Group
C
children
were
lower than Group
B
plus Group
A
children
on
social
domi-
nance
and
social
participation.
Post
hoc
analyses yielded sig-
nificant
Sex X
Attachment
(B vs.
A/C) interactions
on
socio-
metric
status
and
social competence
and
revealed
effects
that
were
probably significant
only
for
girls. Other research
has
sug-
gested
that boys
are
more,
not
less,
vulnerable
to
variations
in
their
experiential
histories
(Zaslow&
Hayes,
1986).
Subsequently,
data
from
these
40
children
were
combined
with
data
from
56
children
who
were
in
other
daycare
settings
(Erickson,
Sroufe,
&
Egeland,
1985).
When
the 60
children
who
had the
same attachment classifications
at
12
and
18
months
were
compared, measures
of
agency,
dependency, social skills,
and
compliance yielded
the
expected
effects
for
attachment,
al-
though
there were
no
differences
on
measures
of
positive
and
negative
affect.
Two of the five
factors
on a
version
of
Behar"s
(1977)
Preschool Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ) (Hostility
and
Gives
Up,
Cries)
and two of the five
factors
on
Erickson
and
Egeland's
(1981)
Behavior Problem Scale
(Exhibitionalistic-
Impulsive
and
Withdrawal) also yielded
significant
group
differences.
In no
case were Group
B
infants
distinguished
from
both Group
A and
Group
C
infants
in
pair-wise
contrasts.
On
the
basis
of
these measures,
the
children
were
then
as-
signed
to
four
groups.
Infants
placed
in
Group
B at
both
12
and
18
months
were
most
often
deemed
to
have
no
behavior
problems;
a
higher proportion
of
those
in the
other groups
at
both ages
were
in the
withdrawn group,
and
infants
considered
mixed
in
attachment status
(in
Group
B at one age and in the
other groups
at
another)
were
scattered
throughout
the
three
behavior-problem
groups.
The
association
between
early
at-
tachment status
and
subsequent behavior
was
quite weak, how-
ever.
In
addition, early attachment status
was
associated
with
behavior
at
preschool
only
when
attachment status
was
stable,
implying
continuity
in the
quality
of
caretaking.
Overall,
the
Minnesota studies revealed
an
array
of
associa-
tions between strange-situation behavior
and
subsequent child
performance.
The
associations
were
largely
limited
to
compari-
sons
of
Group
B
versus Groups
A and C;
however,
Group
A and
Group
C
infants
were
poorly
distinguished despite
differences
in
the
supposed
experiential
origins
of and
internal working
models
associated
with these patterns
(Ainsworth
et
al.,
1978;
cf.
Lamb
et
al.,
1985).
In
addition,
an
impressive number
of
measures
failed
to
reveal
the
predicted
differences
and,
as
fur-
ther documented here, many
findings
were inconsistent
from
study
to
study. Most important, longitudinal predictions
ap-
peared limited
to
cases
where there
was
consistency
over
time
in
family
and
child-care
circumstances. Thus,
the
available evi-
dence
does
not
support conclusions that early patterns
of
par-
ent-child
interaction
are
formatively
significant,
or
indeed, that
the
direction
of
effects
runs
from
parent-child
interaction
to
external performance.
Exploratory
and
Cognitive
Competence
and
Problem-Solving
Other researchers
have
focused
on
many
of the
constructs
identified
by
Sroufe
and his
colleagues,
but the
studies
have
been
much more narrowly focused.
Bell
(1970)
assessed
33 in-
fants
on
tests
of
object
and
person permanence three times
be-
tween
8
J
and
11
months
of
age and
wrote that
"babies
in
Group
B
were
the
only
ones
to
show
a
positive decalage [person perma-
nence
in
advance
of
object
permanence]
....
All but one of
the
babies
in
Groups
A and C had a
negative
decalage"
(p.
303).
Bell
also
found
that babies
in the
positive decalage group
had
significantly
higher
object concept scores.
Unfortunately,
all of
the
strange-situation classifications were based
on
narratives
dictated
by the
person
who
assessed
object
and
person perma-
nence.
In
addition, task demands
for the
assessments
of
object
and
person permanence
were
not
equivalent (cf. Jackson,
Campos,
&
Fischer,
1978),
and the
person-permanence task
varied across
infants.2
This
may
explain
why
Levitt,
Antonucci,
and
Clark
(1984)
failed
to
replicate Bell's
findings.
Group
A
subjects scored marginally higher
on the
object-permanence
than
on the
person-permanence scale
(p <
.07), whereas Group
B
subjects scored
at
essentially
the
same
level
on
both
scales.
There
was no
difference
between Group
A and
Group
B
infants
on the
overall
level
of
concept attainment.
Other
aspects
of
cognitive
and
linguistic development
have
also been related
to
strange-situation
classifications.
Tracy,
Par-
ish,
and
Bremerton (1980) studied
the
association between
strange-situation behavior
(at
13
months)
and
exploratory com-
petence
(at
12
months),
but
only
1 of 16
measures revealed
a
significant
group
difference.
Belsky,
Garduque,
and
Hrncir
(1984)
reported
that Group
B
infants
contemporaneously
en-
gaged
in
more
transitional
play
(a
type
of
play
that
shows
a
cur-
vilinear relationship
with
age
from
7 to 24
months)
and
showed
2
The
objects
were
hidden
behind
small
screens
(like
towels
or
cush-
ions),
whereas
the
person
(sometimes
the
mother,
sometimes
the
experi-
menter)
hid
behind
items
of
furniture
or
large
portable
screens.

820
MICHAEL
E.
LAMB
less
disparity between
the
highest
level
of
play
generated
sponta-
neously
and the
highest
level
that could
be
elicited
by an
experi-
menter:
Mean
scores also ranked
in the
predicted order
on 4
other
measures
of
play.
Hazen
and
Durrett
(1982)
observed
28
children
in the
strange situation
at
12
months
of age and in a
laboratory play-
house between
30 and 34
months
of
age.
On one of five
mea-
sures
of
exploration
and on one of
three measures
of
cognitive
mapping,
the B2 and B3
infants'
scores
differed
from
those
of
both
the
avoidant
(Al,
A2,
Bl)
and
resistant (B4,
Cl,
C2) in-
fants.
There were also
differences
between
the
secure group
and
one of the
anxious groups
on
three other measures.
The
report
thus contained ambiguous evidence regarding
the
predictive
va-
lidity
of the
traditional
strange-situation
groups.
Bates,
Maslin,
and
Frankel
(1985)
and
Frankel
and
Bates
(1983)
obtained
results
consistent
with
those
of
Matas
et
al.
(1978):
Their
findings
suggested
that
the
Group
A and C
infants
and
their mothers tended
to
interact less harmoniously
and
less
effectively
in
later
problem-solving
tasks than
did the
Group
B
dyads,
but
there
were
no
significant
group
differences
on
factor
scores based
on a
factor
analysis
of the
problem-solving mea-
sures.
In
sum,
the
associations between attachment status
and
later
cognitive
competence
or
problem-solving
ability
are
rather
in-
consistent.
The
strongest associations have occurred either
when
the
assessments
were
contemporaneous
or
when
predic-
tive
assessments
involved
the
same
adult
partner, such
as the
mother.
In
the
latter
case,
the
association
over
time could
be
due
to
stability
in
adult characteristics
or to
stability
in
their
interactive
harmony
rather than
to a
stable attribute
of the
child. Without
assessments
of
both attachment
and
cognitive
competence
at
both time
points,
it is not
appropriate
to
con-
clude
that
differences
in
attachment
produce
differences
in
cog-
nitive
performance, especially
when
there
is
high
stability
in
family
and
child-care circumstances.
Cooperation
and
Compliance
The first
study
of
cooperation
and
compliance
was
conducted
by
Main
(1973,
1983),
who
related
12-month
strange-situation
behavior
to
performance
in a
Bayley
test session
at
20.5
months
and
in a
50-min
play
session
with
a
somewhat
familiar
woman
at
21
months.
The
vast
majority
of the
measures showed sig-
nificant
Group
B
versus
non-Group-B
differences
favoring
the
Group
B
infants,
but
Main's
findings are
somewhat
difficult
to
interpret because
of
significant
group
differences
in
develop-
mental
quotient
(DQ),
which have
not
been
found
in any
other
studies
(Egeland
&
Farber,
1982;Joffe,
1981;
Matas
etal.,
1978;
Pastor,
1981;
Waters,
Wippman,
&
Sroufe,
1979).
Because
DQ
and
sociability/cooperativeness
are
correlated (Lamb, 1982;
Main,
1983),
it is
necessary
to
control
for
differences
in DQ and
to
then examine group
differences
on the
other measures.
Londerville
and
Main
(1981)
focused
on
maternal training
methods
and filial
compliance
in the
Bayley
assessment
and
play
session.
All
measures showed that Group
B
infants
were
more
compliant
and
cooperative
and
were less disobedient
but
more
troublesome
(by
maternal
report)
than
the
Group
A, C, and
unclassifiable
infants
combined. Mothers
of
Group
B
infants
also used warmer tones
and
were less
forceful.
Resistance
to the
stranger
at
12
months
was
unrelated
to
compliance,
but
resis-
tance
to the
mother
was
negatively related
to
cooperation
with
the
Bayley
tester
and to
compliance
with
the
mother.
Again,
these
findings are
difficult
to
interpret
in the
absence
of
statisti-
cal
controls
for the
effects
of DQ.
Bates
et al.
(1985) observed
infants
at
home
11
months
after
the
strange-situation
assessments.
The
Group
B
classification
predicted less
maternal
negative control, less child resistance
to
maternal control,
and
higher
levels
of
reciprocal interaction
at
24
months
but
predicted
no
differences
in
child
compliance
(Maslin, 1983). Finally, Miyake
et al.
(1981
-1982)
were
unable
to
replicate
Londerville
and
Main's
(1981)
findings,
although
their results
were
loosely consistent.
In a
problem-solving pro-
cedure
at 16
months
and a
delay-of-gratification
procedure
at
20
months,
the
proportion
of
obedient-to-disobedient
re-
sponses
was
significantly
higher
for
Group
B
than
for
Group
B4
or
Group
C
infants.
At
16
months,
however, there were
no
group
differences
in the
frequencies
of
maternal commands, obedient
responses,
and
disobedient responses,
and at 20
months
there
were
no
group
differences
in the
number
of
infant
requests
or
demands,
the
number
of
maternal responses
or
commands,
or
the
number
of
obedient
or
disobedient
responses.
Taken
together, these
findings
suggest that Group
B
infants
may
later
get
along better
with
their mothers than
non-Group-
B
infants
do,
although
confident
conclusions
are
limited
by the
failure
to
replicate
specific
findings
from
study
to
study,
by the
possibility
of a
covariate
(DQ) underlying both attachment
and
cooperation
or
compliance,
and by the
failure
to
study
or
iden-
tify
the
expected
differences
between Group
A and
Group
C
infants.
In
addition,
the
studies
have
been designed
so
that
one
cannot determine whether prior
or
contemporaneous patterns
of
parent-child
interaction (including
interaction
in the
test sit-
uations)
are
more important. Indeed, without assessments
of
both constructs
on
both occasions,
it is
inappropriate
to
reach
any
conclusions
about
the
effects
of
maternal
behavior
on
child
compliance.
Behavior
Problems
Bates
et al.
(1985)
attempted
to
relate attachment
classifica-
tions
at
13
months
to
measures
of
behavior problems
at 36
months. Early maternal
perceptions
were
the
best
predictors
of
behavior problems, whereas attachment variables
were
essen-
tially
unrelated
to PBQ
ratings
by
either
mothers
or
secondary
care providers.
Apparently,
other
factors
may be at
least
as im-
portant
as
early attachment status
in
predicting preschool
be-
havior
problems,
Lewis,
Feiring,
McGuffog,
and
Jaskir
(1984)
assessed behav-
ior
problems
using
Achenbach's
(1978)
checklist
and
found
group
differences
for
boys,3
but not for
girls,
on the
Internaliz-
ing
(B < A < C),
Schizoid Behavior Problems
(A > B),
Depres-
sion
(C > B),
Social Withdrawal
(C > B),
Uncommunicative
Behavior
(A < B and C > B), and
Somatic Complaints
(A >
B
and C > B)
scales. There
were
effects
for
girls
only
on the
3
Lewis,
Feiring,
McGuflog,
and
Jaskir's
(1984)
attachment
classifi-
cations
were
assigned
on the
basis
of
reactions
to
reunion
in a
laboratory
playroom
following
a
single
brief
(3-min)
separation
at
12
months.

SPECIAL
SERIES:
INDIVIDUAL
DIFFERENCES
IN
ATTACHMENT
821
Externalizing
scale
(C < A = B).
Forty
percent
of the
Group
A
and
Group
C
boys were deemed
at risk for
later
psychopathol-
ogy
by
Achenbach
and
Edelbrock's
(1981)
criteria
compared
with
15%
of the
Group
A, B, and C
girls
and
about
6% of the
Group
B
boys.
However,
a
discriminant
function
analysis indi-
cated that those boys
who
experienced
negative environmental
factors
were more likely
to be at
risk, suggesting
that
early
at-
tachment classifications,
in
interaction with subsequent experi-
ences,
influenced
whether
or not
boys would later manifest psy-
chopathology.
Lewis
et
al.
provocatively concluded
that
"infants
neither
are
made invulnerable
by
secure attachments
nor are
they
doomed
by
insecure attachments
to
later psychopathol-
ogy"
(p.
134).
Given
the sex
differences
and the
other
inconsis-
tencies
in the
literature, this conclusion
appears
appropriate
for
all
research
on
this
topic.
Sociability
With
Unfamiliar
Adults
Several
investigators have studied
the
association between
strange-situation
behavior
and the
quality
of
interaction
with
unfamiliar
adults.
In
Main
and
Weston's
(1981)
study,
a
clown
attempted
to
evoke emotional
reactions
from
12-month-old
in-
fants.
Only
1 of 23
infants
who
were classified
in
Group
B
with
their
mothers showed
conflict
behavior compared with
11
of
21
Group
A,
Group
C, or
unclassified
infants.
Group
B
infants
also
scored
highest
on the
stranger-relatedness
measure,
al-
though there
was no
statistical
test
of the
difference.
However,
because
conflict
behavior, relatedness,
and
attachment were
as-
sessed
within
a
week,
this
study
did not
provide evidence
re-
garding
predictive validity.
The
information
was
further
limited
by
the
lack
of
detail regarding
the
constructs
assessed.
Thompson
and
Lamb
(1983)
assessed
sociability toward
un-
familiar
adults immediately prior
to
strange
situations
at
12.5
and
19.5 months.
At
each
age,
the
Bl
and
B2
infants
were
most
sociable
and the C2, B3, and
B4
infants
were least
sociable,
even
though,
given
the
frequency
of
changes
in
classification
(Thompson, Lamb,
&
Estes,
1982),
different
infants
fell
in
each
of
the
groups
each
time.
When
the
attachment
classifications
changed
over
time,
the
sociability
scores
at
each
age
were
not
significantly
correlated,
but
they were highly correlated
(r =
.74)
when
the
attachment classification
was the
same
at
both
ages.
These
findings
suggest
that
the
prediction
of
later
socio-
emotional
behavior
may
depend
on
concurrent stability
in at-
tachment
status
or on
patterns
of
parent-child
interaction.
In
Lamb, Hwang,
Frodi,
and
Prodi's
(1982)
study
of
51
Swe-
dish
infants,
infants
who had
Bl
or B2
attachments
with
their
fathers
were
significantly
more
sociable
than those with
B3, B4,
or
A
relationships,
but
there
was no
significant
association
be-
tween
infant-mother attachment classifications
and the
child's
sociability.
Frodi
(1983)
reported
no
group
differences
on
com-
posite
sociability
scores
assigned
to 20
preterm
and 20
full-term
infants.
Taken
together, these
studies
suggest
that
some
Group
B in-
fants
are (at
least
contemporaneously) more sociable
in
their
initial
encounter
with
adult strangers, although
this
difference
is
not
highly
reliable.
No
investigator
has
reported
Group
A
and
Group
C
differences
in
stranger sociability,
however,
despite
the
fact
that Group
A
babies tend
to be
more sociable
with
strangers
in the
strange situation.
Sociability
and
Social
Competence
With
Peers
To
study
the
relations between security
of
attachment
at 1
year
of age and
interactive
skills
with
peers
at 3
years
of
age,
Waters
et al.
(1979) rated security
of
attachment
in a
procedure
involving
a
single infant-mother separation.
Eleven
of the 12
peer-competence
items
and 5 of the
12
ego
strength/effectance
items distinguished Group
B
from
non-Group-B
subjects.
However,
families
were
specifically
selected
on the
grounds that
their
circumstances were
likely
to
remain stable throughout
the
duration
of the
study
(Bronson,
1981).
This
stability
is
likely
to
heighten predictive relationships.
Easterbrooks
and
Lamb
(1979)
found
Bl and B2
versus
B3
versus
B4
differences
on 2 of
21
discrete
behavior
measures
and
on
2 of 3
composite measures
of
peer interaction,
with
the Bl
and B2
18-month-oId
infants
spending more time interacting
with
and
being close
to
their peers than
B3 and B4
infants.
Pair-
wise
contrasts
revealed
significant
Bl
and B2
versus
B3
differ-
ences
on 7
measures
and
B1
and B2
versus
B4
differences
on 5
measures.
As
expected,
the
Bl
and B2
infants
also spent less
time
in the
peer session touching
and
being near
their
mothers,
and
these
differences
in
mother-directed
behavior
make
it
difficult
to
interpret
the
group
differences
on
peer-interaction
measures.
It is
important
to
know
whether group
differences
on
the
peer-interaction measures remained
when
the
variance
attributable
to
mother-directed
behavior
was
partialled
out.
Jacobson,
Wille,
Tianen,
and
Aytch
(1983)
observed
15
Group
A,
15
Group
B, and
15
Group
C
infants
interacting
with
an
unfamiliar,
same-sex Group
B
infant
at
23.5 months.
The
Group
B and
Group
A
infants
engaged
in
more onlooker behav-
ior
than
did the
Group
C
infants,
who
engaged
in
more solitary
play
and
more positive interaction
with
peers than either Group
B
or
Group
A
infants;
the
Group
B
infants
engaged
in the
least
positive interaction
with
peers. Subsequently, Jacobson
and
Wille
(1984, 1986) reported observing
24 of the
children
at 24
and
35
months,
always
with
a
Group
B
playmate.
There were
no
significant group
differences
among
focal
children
at
either
age,
but on one of six
measures (number
of
positive responses),
playmates
paired
with
Group
B
focal
children
scored higher
than
Group
C or
Group
A
children
at 36
months. Given
the
small
sample size,
the
inconsistency
of the
results
at 2 and 3
years,
the
small number
of
significant
effects,
and the
absence
of
clear group
differences
in the
behavior
of
target
or
focal
chil-
dren,
it is
difficult
to
interpret these
findings,
which
contradict
those
reported
by
other researchers.
Overall,
therefore,
associations
between prior strange-situa-
tion
classifications
and
later indices
of
social competence
with
peers
are
equivocal. Only Waters
et al.
(1979)
identified
clear
associations
between attachment status
and
peer competence.
In
this case,
however,
the
design
precluded
inferences
that
Group
B
attachment
led to the
development
of
greater peer
competence; assessments
of
attachment
and
peer competence
on
both
occasions
are
necessary
to
specify
the
nature
and
direc-
tion
of the
association between these
two
constructs.

822
MICHAEL
E,
LAMB
Self-Recognition
Schneider-Rosen
and
Cicchetti
(1984)
hypothesized that,
be-
cause
Group
B
infants
are
able
to
explore their physical
and
social environment more
fully
and
more
trustfully,
they
will
de-
velop
visual
self-recognition
more
readily.
They
found
that
15
of
37
19-month-old
infants
were
capable
of
visual
self-recogni-
tion:
73%
were classified
in
Group
B and 27%
were classified
in
the
other groups.
The
results,
however,
ran
counter
to
those
reported
by
Tajima
(1982-1983)
and
Lewis
et al.
(1985),
who
used measures
of
self-recognition similar
to
those used
by
Schneider-Rosen
and
Cicchetti.
Tajima
found
that
40% of his
Japanese Group
C
infants
recognized themselves
at
16
months
compared with
13%
of the
Group
B
infants,
but
this
difference
was not
statistically significant.
At 20
months,
however,
75% of
the
Group
C
infants
and 27% of the
Group
B
infants
manifested
self-recognition.
Lewis
et al.
found
that Group
A and
Group
C
infants
acquired self-recognition capacities earlier than Group
B
infants,
a
tendency
attributed
to the
fact
"that
children
who
are
stressed,
who
have
less
effective
parents,
need
to act on
their
own.
This
stress
may
facilitate early self-awareness even though
the
self-concept
being formed
may be
less
positive"
(p.
1185).
Whatever
the
reason,
the
fact
that Schneider-Rosen
and
Cic-
chetti
obtained
different
results
and
presented them
in the
con-
text
of
completely divergent hypotheses about
the
association
between
attachment
and
self-recognition underscores both
the
vagueness
of
attachment theory
and the
need
for
further
re-
search
to
clarify
the
association
between strange-situation
be-
havior
and
visual self-recognition.
Conclusion
Group
B and
non-Group-B
infants
do
seem
to
differ
outside
the
strange situation.
For
example, Group
B
infants
may
show
greater exploratory competence,
may be
more
sociable
with
un-
familiar
adults,
and may get
along
better
with peers than non-
Group-B
infants, although these
findings
have
not all
been
rep-
licated. What makes
this
sprawling
literature
both
so
enticing
and so
frustrating
is
that
it
does
not
permit
us to
explain
why
these
differences
are
apparent.
The
clearest evidence
for the
long-term predictive validity
of
strange-situation classifications comes
from the
ambitious Min-
neapolis studies.
In
many
of
these
studies,
however,
stability
in
family
circumstances either could
be
assumed
or was
actually
ensured
by
subject selection
procedures.
This
fact
affects
the
generalizability
of
these
findings and has
important implica-
tions
for
their interpretation. Instead
of
suggesting that experi-
ences during
an
early formative period necessarily
have
long-
term implications
for the
child,
the
data
may
imply that when
there
is
continuity
in
patterns
of
parent-child
interaction
and
in
other circumstances that
are
likely
to
influence
child
develop-
ment,
early patterns
of
child behavior
are
likely
to be
main-
tained.
In
this
case,
recent rather than early
patterns
of
child-
parent interaction
may be the
bases
of
observed
differences
in
follow-up
assessments.
A
second,
and
related, problem
is
that studies
have
been
de-
signed
in
such
a way
that
any
assumptions about
the
direction
of
effects
are
purely speculative. Attachment
is
typically
as-
sessed
on one
(early)
occasion,
and
another construct
is
assessed
later
or
contemporaneously:
To
obtain some insight into
the
direction
of
influence,
particularly
in the
types
of
families
that
have
been studied, researchers need
to
measure both
constructs
on at
least
two
occasions
so
that predictive relations
can be
eval-
uated
in the
context
of
autocorrelations
as
well
as
contempora-
neous
associations
between constructs.
A
third problem
is
that
the
same adult
often
participates
in
both
the
early
strange-situation
assessment
and in the
follow-up
procedure.
Although
it is
often
difficult
to
assess
socioemc-
tional
behavior without
the
supportive presence
of a
parent,
studies
so
designed introduce
an
important
confound
into
the
evidence
for
predictive
validity
because
many
researchers
have
found
that
the
mothers
of
Group
B, A, and C
infants
also
differ
in
follow-up
assessments.
Because
the
mothers
also
participate
in
the
strange situation,
we
cannot tell whether consistency
in
infant
behavior
over
time
is due to
stable
infant
characteristics
or
to the
consistent behavior
of the
parent.
Unfortunately,
no
researcher
has
statistically controlled
for
variations
in the
adult's
behavior
in
examining attachment group
differences
in
later behavior, although many
have
the
data
for
accomplishing
this.
Fourth,
few
researchers
have
found
reliable
differences
be-
tween
Group
A and
Group
C
infants,
even
though these should
be
found
if, as
predicted
by
attachment
theorists,
strange-situa-
tion
classifications reflect individual
differences
in
internal
working
models
attributable
to
differences
in the
child's
experi-
ential history.
The
failure
to
identify
specific,
replicable
differ-
ences
between these groups
is
of
crucial importance
in
assessing
the
predictive
validity
of
strange-situation
behavior:
In
their
ab-
sence,
the
theoretical
underpinnings
of the
procedure
are
opened
to
question.
Another
key
issue
is the
reliance
on
analytic
and
methodolog-
ical
procedures that potentially bias
the
results
in
favor
of find-
ing
differences.
Selective sample recruitment
is but one
exam-
ple
of
this general tendency.
The use of
broad
rating scales
is
problematic
because
of the
potential
for
generalized halo
effects
that
influence
multiple observer ratings
and
result
in an
appar-
ent
array
of
significant
group
differences.
Although
many mea-
sures
are
often
used, attention
is
focused
almost
exclusively
on
those
that
reveal group differences. Typically,
no
concern
is ex-
pressed about
the
number
of
measures that
fail
to reveal
group
differences,
about
the
inconsistencies
between significant
and
nonsignificant
findings
in
terms
of the
general formulations
be-
ing
tested,
or
about
the
failure
to
replicate
the findings on
spe-
cific,
similar measures. Thus
an
incomplete picture
is
often
pre-
sented,
implying
stronger evidence
of
predictive validity than
actually
exists.
Much
of the
difficulty
lies
in the
vagueness
of
hypotheses
that
allow
researchers
to
explain
in a
post
hoc
fashion
why
compara-
ble
measures revealed contradictory
findings or
why
only
a
sub-
sample
of the
measures revealed
differences
consistent
with
the
hypotheses.
The
nonspecific
hypothesis that Group
B
children
will
be
better
at
later ages than
will
Group
A or C
children
is
easy
to
prove
when
many measures
of
later
functioning
are
used,
but
this shotgun strategy
has not
been successful
in
iden-
tifying
the
specific
sequelae
of
early
patterns
of
strange-situation
behavior.
Rather than expecting attachment status
to
predict
multiple
indices
of
good
functioning
at
later
ages,
in
other
words,
it is
time
to
develop more
specific
hypotheses concerning

SPECIAL
SERIES: INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
IN
ATTACHMENT
823
the
aspects
of
later
behavior
that attachment status should (and
should
not) predict
well.
Discriminant
as
well
as
convergent
validity
should
be an
important research goal. This kind
of
research strategy
is not
only
likely
to
yield
clearer,
stronger
evidence
concerning later
differences
between Group
B and
non-Group-B
infants
but may
also provide
a
better
way
of
iden-
tifying
the
sequelae
of
Group
A and
Group
C
status.
In
sum, although there
do
appear
to be
some reliable associa-
tions between strange-situation behavior
and
other child char-
acteristics
(at
least
in
Group
B vs.
non-Group-B
comparisons)
such
relations
appear
to be
significant only when
there
is
conti-
nuity
in
caretaking
conditions
(or
when
the
assessments
are
contemporaneous),
and
study designs
often
preclude strong
in-
ferences
about
the
direction
of
effects
because
they
do not in-
volve
measures
of
both constructs
on at
least
two
occasions.
Thus,
early
experiences
in
interaction with
the
stability
and
quality
of
environmental conditions
may
combine
to
predict
later
socioemotional
functioning.
Beyond
this general state-
ment
concerning
the
associations
between early attachment
and
later outcomes
given
stable
circumstances
in the
interim, how-
ever,
there
is
little
we can say
confidently
about
the
specific
effects
of
early attachment
status.
References
Achenbach,
T. M.
(1978).
The
child behavior profile:
I.
Boys aged
6-
11.
Journal
of
Consulting
and
Clinical
Psychology.
46,
478-488.
Achenbach,
T.
M.,
&
Edelbrock,
C. S.
(1981).
Behavioral
problems
and
competencies
reported
by
parents
of
normal
and
disturbed children
aged
4
through
16.
Monographs
of
the
Society
for
Research
in
Child
Development,
46(1,
Serial
No.
188).
Ainsworth,
M. D.
S.,
Blehar,
M.
C.,
Waters,
E., &
Wall,
S.
(1978).
Pat-
terns
of
attachment.
Hillsdale,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Ainsworth,
M. D.
S.,
&
Wittig,
B. A.
(1969).
Attachment
and
explor-
atory
behavior
of
one-year-olds
in a
strange
situation.
In B. M.
Foss
(Ed.),
Determinants
of
infant
behavior
(Vol.
4, pp.
111
-136).
London:
Methuen.
Arend,
R.,
Gove,
F. L., &
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1979).
Continuity
of
individual
adaptation
from
infancy
to
kindergarten:
A
predictive study
of
ego-
resiliency
and
curiosity
in
preschoolers.
Child
Development,
50,950-
959.
Bates,
J.
E.,
Maslin,
L.
A.,
&
Frankel,
K.
A.
(1985).
Attachment secu-
rity,
mother-child
interaction,
and
temperament
as
predictors
of be-
havior problem ratings
at
age
three
years.
In I.
Bretherton
& E.
Waters
(Eds.),
Growing
points
of
attachment theory
and
research
(pp.
167-
193).
Monographs
of
the
Society
for
Research
in
Child
Development,
50(1-2,
Serial
No.
209).
Behar,
L. B.
(1977).
The
preschool
behavior
questionnaire.
Journal
of
Abnormal
Child
Psychology,
5,265-275.
Bell,
S. M. V.
(1970).
The
development
of the
concept
of
object
as re-
lated
to
infant-mother
attachment.
Child
Development,
41,291-311.
Belsky,
J.,
Garduque,
L.,
&
Hrncir,
E.
(1984). Assessing performance,
competence
and
executive capacity
in
infant
play: Relations
to
home
environment
and
security
of
attachment.
Developmental
Psychology,
20,406-417.
Block,
J.,
&
Block,
J. H.
(1980).
The
role
of ego
control
and ego
resil-
iency
in the
organization
of
behavior.
In W. A.
Collins
(Ed.),
Minne-
sota
symposia
on
child
psychology
(Vol.
13, pp.
39-101).
Hillsdale,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Bowlby,
J.
(19
51).
Maternal
care
and
mental health. Geneva, Switzer-
land: World Health
Organization.
Bowlby,
J.
(1958).
The
nature
of the
child's
tie to his
mother. Interna-
tional
Journal
of
Psychoanalysis,
39,
350-373.
Bowlby,
J.
(1969). Attachment
and
loss:
Vol.
I.
Attachment.
New
York:
Basic Books.
Bowlby,
J.(
1973).
Attachment
and
loss:
Vol.
2.
Separation:
Anxiety
and
anger.
New
York:
Basic Books.
Branson,
W. C.
(1981).
Toddlers'
behaviors
with
agemates:
Issues
of
interaction,
cognition,
and
affect.
Norwood,
NJ:
Ablex.
Easterbrooks,
M.
A.,
&
Lamb,
M. E.
(1979).
The relationship
between
quality
of
infant-mother attachment
and
infant
competence
in
initial
encounters
with
peers.
Child
Development,
50,
380-387.
Egeland,
B.,
&
Farber,
E. A.
(1982). Antecedents
of
infant-mother
at-
tachment
relationships
in
economically
disadvanlaged
families.
Un-
published
manuscript, University
of
Minnesota,
Minneapolis.
Erickson,
M.
F.,
&
Crichton,
L.
(1981,
April).
Antecedents
of
compli-
ance
in
2-year-olds
from
a
high-risk
sample. Paper presented
to the
Society
for
Research
in
Child Development, Boston.
Erickson,
M. F,
&
Egeland,
B.
(1981).
Behavior problem
scale:
Techni-
cal
manual. Unpublished manuscript, University
of
Minnesota, Min-
neapolis.
Erickson,
M. F, &
Farber,
E. A.
(1983, April).
Infancy
to
preschool:
Continuity
of
adaptation
in
high
risk
children.
Papa
presented
at the
meeting
of the
Society
for
Research
in
Child Development,
Detroit,
MI.
Erickson,
M. F,
Sroufe,
L.
A.,
&
Egeland,
B.
(1985).
The
relationship
between quality
of
attachment
and
behavior
problems
in
preschool
in a
high-risk sample.
In I.
Bretherton
& E.
Waters
(Eds.),
Growing
points
of
attachment theory
and
research
(pp.
147-166).
Mono-
graphs
of
the
Society
for
Research
in
Child
Development,
50
(1-2,
Serial
No.
209).
Frankel,
K. F, &
Bates,
J. E.
(1983).
Mother-toddler interactions
while
solving
problems: Correlations with
attachment
security
and
interac-
tion
at
home. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana
Univereity,
Bloomin-
gton,
IN.
Frodi,
A.
(1983).
Attachment behavior
and
sociability
with
strangers
in
premature
and
fullterm
infants.
Infant
Mental
Health
Journal,
4,13-
22.
Frodi,
A.,
Lamb,
M.
E.,
Leavitt,
L.
A.,
&
Donovan,
W. L.
(1978).
Fa-
thers'
and
mothers'
responses
to
infant
smiles
and
cries.
Infant
Behav-
ior
and
Development,
1,
181-198.
Goldsmith,
H.
H.,
&
Alansky,
J. A.
(1987).
Maternal
and
infant
temper-
amental
predictors
of
attachment:
A
meta-analytic
review.
Journal
of
Consulting
and
Clinical
Psychology,
55,
805-816.
Harlow,
H. F.
(1958).
The
nature
of
love. American
Psychologist,
13,
673-685.
Harlow,
H.
F.,
&
Zimmerman,
R. R.
(1959).
Affectual
responses
in in-
fant
monkeys. Science,
130,421^t32.
Hazen,
N. G., &
Durrett,
M. E.
(1982).
Relationship
of
security
of at-
tachment
to
exploration
and
cognitive mapping
abilities
in
2-year-
olds.
Developmental
Psychology,
IS,
751-759.
Jackson,
E.,
Campos,
J.,
&
Fischer,
K.
(1978).
The
question
of
decalage
between object permanence
and
person
permanence.
Developmental
Psychology,
14,
1-10.
Jacobson,
J.
L.,
&
Wille,
D. E.
(1984).
Influence
of
attachment
and
separation
experience
on
separation
distress
at
18
months.
Develop-
mental
Psychology,
20,
477-484.
Jacobson,
J.
L.,
&
Wille,
D. E.
(1986).
The
inuuence
of
attachment
pattern
on
developmental changes
in
peer interaction
from
the
tod-
dler
to the
preschool period. Child
Development,
57,
338-347.
Jacobson,
J.
L.,
Wille,
D.
E.,
Tianen,
R.
L.,
&
Aytch,
D. M.
(1983,
April).
The
influence
of
infant-mother
attachment
on
toddler
socia-
bility
with
peers. Paper presented
at the
meeting
of
the
Society
for
Research
in
Child Development, Detroit,
MI.
Jofle,
L.
(1981,
April).
The
quality
of
mother-infant
attachment
and its
relationship
to
compliance
with
maternal commands
and
prohibi-

824
MICHAEL
E.
LAMB
turns-
Paper
presented
at the
meeting
of the
Society
(or
Research
in
Child
Development,
Boston.
LaFreniere,
P. J., &
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1985).
Profiles
of
peer competence
in
the
preschool: Interrelations between measures, influences
of
social
ecology,
and
relation
to
attachment history.
Developmental
Psychol-
ogy,
21,
56-69.
Lamb,
M. E.
(1982). Individual
differences
in
infant
sociability: Their
origins
and
implications
for
cognitive development.
In
H. W.
Reese
&
L. P.
Lipsitt
(Eds.),
Advances
in
child
development
and
behavior
(Vol.
16, pp.
213-239).
New
York:
Academic.
Lamb,
M.
E.,
Hwang,
C. P.,
Frodi,
A.,
&
Frodi,
M.
(1982). Security
of
mother-
and
father-infant attachment
and its
relation
to
sociability
with
strangers
in
traditional
and
non-traditional Swedish families.
In-
fant
Behavior
and
Development,
5,
355-367.
Lamb,
M.
E.,
Thompson,
R.
A.,
Gardner,
W.,
&
Charnov,
E. L.
(1985).
Infant-mother
attachment:
The
origins
and
developmental
signifi-
cance
of
individual
differences
in
strange
situation
behavior.
Hills-
dale,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Levitt,
M.
!.,
Antonucci,
T. G., &
Clark,
M. C.
(1984).
Object-person
permanence
and
attachment: Another look.
Merrill-Palmer
Quar-
terly,
30,
1-10.
Lewis,
M.,
Brooks-Gunn,
J.,
&
Jaskir,
J.
(1985).
Individual
differences
in
visual self-recognition
as a
function
of
mother-infant attachment
relationship.
Developmental
Psychology,
21,
1181-1187.
Lewis,
M.,
Feiring,
C.,
McGuffog,
C, &
Jaskir,
J.
(1984). Predicting
psychopathology
in
six-year-olds
from
early social relations.
Child
Development,
55,
123-136.
Londerville,
S., &
Main,
M.
(1981).
Security
of
attachment,
compli-
ance,
and
maternal training methods
in the
second year
of
life.
Devel-
opmental
Psychology,
17,
289-299.
Main,
M.
(1973).
Exploration,
play
and
cognitive
functioning
as
related
to
child-mother
attachment. Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation,
Johns
Hopkins University.
Main,
M.
(1983). Exploration,
play,
and
cognitive
functioning
related
to
infant-mother
attachment.
Infant
Behavior
and
Development,
6,
167-174.
Main,
M. B., &
Weston,
D. R.
(1981).
The
quality
of the
toddler's
rela-
tionship
to
mother
and to
father
Related
to
conflict
behavior
and the
readiness
to
establish
new
relationships.
Child
Development,
52,932-
940.
Maslin,
C. A.
(1983).
Anxious
and
secure
attachments:
Antecedents
and
consequences
within
the
mother-infant
system. Unpublished doc-
toral
dissertation,
Indiana University.
Matas,
L.,
Arend,
R.
A.,
&
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1978).
Continuity
of
adapta-
tion
in the
second yean
The
relationship between quality
of
attach-
ment
and
later competence.
Child
Development,
49,
547-556.
Miyake,
K.,
Chen,
S-J.,
Ujiie,
T,
Tajima,
N.,
Satoh,
K.,
&
Takahashi,
K.
(1981-1982).
Infant's temperamental
disposition,
mother's
mode
of
interaction, quality
of
attachment,
and
infant's receptivity
to
so-
cialization—Interim
progress
report.
In
Annual
report:
Research
and
clinical
center
of
child
development
(pp.
25-49).
Sapparo,
Japan:
Hokkaido University, Faculty
of
Education.
Pastor,
D. L.
(1980,
April).
The
quality
of
mother-infant
attachment
and
Us
relationship
to
toddlers'
initial
sociability
with
peers.
Paper
presented
at the
International Conference
on
Infant
Studies,
New Ha-
ven,
CT.
Pastor,
D. L.
(1981).
The
quality
of
mother-infant attachment
and its
relationship
to
toddlers'
initial sociability
with
peers.
Developmental
Psychology,
17,
326-335.
Schneider-Rosen,
K.,
&
Cicchetti,
D.
(1984).
The
relationship between
affect
and
cognition
in
maltreated infants: Quality
of
attachment
and
the
development
of
visual
self-recognition.
Child
Development,
55,
648-658.
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1978).
Attachment
and the
roots
of
competence. Human
Nature,
1(10),
50-57.
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1979).
The
coherence
of
individual development. Ameri-
can
Psychologist,
34.
834-841.
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1983).
Individual patterns
of
adaptation
from
infancy
to
preschool.
In M.
Perlmutter
(Ed.),
Minnesota
symposium
on
child
psychology
(Vol.
16, pp.
41-83).
Hillsdale,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Sroufe,
L.
A.,
Fox,
N.
E.,
&
Pancake,
V. R.
(1983).
Attachment
and
dependency
in
developmental perspective.
Child
Development.
54,
1615-1627.
Sroufe,
L.
A.,
&
Rosenberg,
D.
(1982,
March).
Coherence
of
individual
adaptation
in
lower
class
infants
and
toddlers.
Paper presented
at the
meeting
of the
International Conference
on
Infant
Studies, Austin,
TX.
Tajima,
N.
(1982-1983).
Infant's
temperamental disposition, attach-
ment,
and
self-recognition
in the first 20
months
of
life.
In
Annual
report:
Research
and
clinical
center
for
child
development
(pp.
71-
80).
Sapporo,
Japan: Hokkaido
University,
Faculty
of
Education.
Thompson,
R.
A.,
&
Lamb,
M. E.
(1983).
Security
of
attachment
and
stranger sociability
in
infancy.
Developmental
Psychology,
19,
184-
191.
Thompson,
R.
A.,
Lamb,
M.
E.,
&
Estes,
D.
(1982). Stability
of
infant-
mother
attachment
and its
relationship
to
changing
life
circum-
stances
in an
unselected
middle class sample.
Child
Development,
53,
144-148.
Tracy,
R.
L.,
Parish,
G.
D.,
&
Bretherton,
I.
(1980, April).
Exploration
as
related
to
infant-mother
attachment
in
one-year-olds.
Paper pre-
sented
at the
International Conference
on
Infant
Studies,
New
Haven,
CT.
Vaughn,
B.,
Egeland,
B.,
Sroufe,
L.
A.,
&
Waters,
E.
(1979).
Individual
differences
in
infant-mother attachment
at
twelve
and
eighteen
months: Stability
and
change
in
families
under
stress.
Child
Develop-
ment,
50,971-975.
Waters,
E.,
Wippman,
J.,
&
Sroufe,
L. A.
(1979).
Attachment, positive
affect,
and
competence
in the
peer group:
Two
studies
in
construct
validation.
Child
Development,
50,
821-829.
Zaslow,
M.
J.,
&
Hayes,
C. D.
(1986).
Sex
differences
in
children's
re-
sponse
to
psychosocial
stress: Toward
a
cross-context
analysis.
In
M. E.
Lamb,
A. L.
Brown,
& B.
Rogoff(Eds.),
Advances
in
develop-
mental
psychology
(\<A.
4, pp.
285-337).
Hillsdale,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Received
March
9,
1987
Revision
received
March
23,1987
Accepted
March
23,
1987
•