Cited by 135Attachment and Relationship DynamicsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum

Adult attachment style and stress as risk factors for early maternal sensitivity and negativity

Open access
Mills‐Koonce, W. Roger, Appleyard, Karen, Barnett, Melissa, Deng, Min, Putallaz, Martha, Cox, Martha·2011·Infant Mental Health Journal

Abstract

The current study examined the individual and joint effects of self‐reported adult attachment style, psychological distress, and parenting stress on maternal caregiving behaviors at 6 and 12 months of child age. We proposed a diathesis‐stress model to examine the potential deleterious effects of stress for mothers with insecure adult attachment styles. Data from 137 mothers were gathered by the longitudinal Durham Child Health and Development Study. Mothers provided self‐reports using C. Hazan and P. Shaver's (1987) Adult Attachment Style measure, the Brief Symptom Inventory (L.R. Derogatis & P.M. Spencer, 1982), and the Parent Stress Inventory (R.R. Abidin, 1995); observations of parenting data were made from 10‐min free‐play interactions. Consistently avoidant mothers were less sensitive with their infants than were consistently secure mothers; however, this effect was limited to avoidant mothers who experienced elevated levels of psychological distress. Results suggest that the association between insecure adult attachment style and insensitive parenting behavior is moderated by concurrent psychosocial stress. Clinical implications for these findings are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/imhj.20296

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Perceived parenting stress disrupts the ability of mothers to appropriately assess infant signals and to react sensitively to them.

    “Indeed, perceived parenting stress disrupts the ability of mothers to appropriately assess infant signals and to react sensitively to them.38”

    From Effectiveness and acceptability of cognitive-behavioural therapy based interventions for maternal peripartum depression: A systematic review, meta-analysis and thematic synthesis protocol (2019) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Results (Descriptive Statistics and Correlations among Covariates; page unavailable) report that parenting stress was negatively associated with maternal sensitivity. But the Discussion says only psychological distress independently predicted sensitivity after demographic controls. The paper does not show that parenting stress disrupts mothers’ assessment of infant signals or establish a causal effect on their responses. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Shaver P Mikulincer M What do self-report attachment measures assess? Adult attachment: Theory, research, and clinical implications 2004 17 54 Guilford Press NY

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mills‐Koonce, W. R., Appleyard, K., Barnett, M., Deng, M., Putallaz, M., & Cox, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Venue
Infant Mental Health Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-04-11
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
277-285
ISSN
  • 0163-9641 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0355
OpenAlex
W2063302185
Cited by
135
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
9.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Infant Mental Health Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0126475)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (T32HD007376)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Keywords
adult attachment styles, insecure attachment, attachment avoidance, maternal sensitivity, maternal negativity, parental stress, psychological distress, diathesis-stress model, infant care, early infancy, mother-infant interaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review