Cited by 68Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAttachment and Relationship DynamicsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Children and Adolescents: Can Attachment Theory Contribute to Its Efficacy?

Bosmans, Guy·2016·Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review

Abstract

Meta-analyses consistently demonstrate that cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) provides effective evidence-based treatment for children and adolescents with emotional and behaviour problems. Also consistent across meta-analyses is the observation that CBT treatment effects are often medium in size. This observation has instigated a search for factors that could help explain the limited treatment effects and that could be focused upon to enhance CBT treatment outcomes. The current qualitative review focuses on the parent-child attachment relationship as one factor that could be relevant to enhance CBT treatment effects. This review first acknowledges reasons why CBT has historically not been attracted to attachment theory and its postulates. Second, recent evidence is examined to evaluate whether attachment can be approached from a cognitive schema perspective. Subsequently, research is described showing how restoring attachment relationships could result in large treatment effects. Finally, this evidence is integrated in a model of attachment assessment and intervention that might be compatible with CBT. In sum, this review suggests that restoring trust in insecure parent-child attachment relationships can be integrated within CBT and could contribute to its treatment outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10567-016-0212-3

Cites

150 of 150 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bosmans, G.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Bosmans, Guy
Venue
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
Published
2016-08-30
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
310-328
ISSN
  • 1096-4037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2827
OpenAlex
W2509870210
Cited by
68
References
150
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (G.0934.12, G.0774.15)
  • Onderzoeksraad, KU Leuven (OT/12/043, CREA/12/004)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, attachment theory, parent-child attachment, insecure attachment, trust, cognitive schemas, treatment efficacy, children and adolescents
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Humans, Object Attachment, Parent-Child Relations, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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