Finding order in disorganization: lessons from research on maltreated infants' attachments to their caregivers
Abstract
There is more to be learnt from the study of disarray than is gained by intentionally disregarding it. Although Bowlby's original formulations on attachment emerged from observations of clinical populations (Bowlby, 1944, 1958, 1977a, 1977b; Rutter, 1979), until recently we possessed only rudimentary empirical information regarding attachment relationships in clinically disordered populations. However, during the past decade, as research in the discipline of developmental psychopathology has burgeoned (cf. Cicchetti, 1984a, 1984b; Rolf, Masten, Cicchetti, Neuchterlein, and Weintraub, in press; Rutter & Garmezy, 1983), increased attention has been paid toward understanding the organization of the attachment system in handicapped, “high-risk” and clinically disordered groups of youngsters (see, for example, Cicchetti and Serafica, 1981; Crittenden, 1988; Egeland and Sroufe, 1981a, 1981b; Radke-Yarrow, Cummings, Kuczynski, and Chapman, 1985; Sigman and Ungerer, 1984). Proponents of attachment theory have argued that many psychopathological disorders may be brought about by deviations in the development of the attachment behavioral system or, much less commonly, by failure of its ontogenesis (Ainsworth, 1973, 1980; Bowlby, 1969/1982, 1977a, 1977b; Cic-chetti, 1987; Guidano and Liotti, 1983). Additionally, advocates of the attachment theory perspective have stated that strong causal relationships exist between children's experiences with their caregivers and their later capacities…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Maltreated youth frequently manifest highly problematic attachment relationships with their parents and other adults.
“Indeed, maltreated youth frequently manifest highly problematic attachment relationships with their parents and other adults (e.g., Carlson, Cicchetti, Barnett, & Braunwald, 1989) and may find it relatively difficult to establish close, supportive relationship with mentors.”
From The Test of Time: Predictors and Effects of Duration in Youth Mentoring Relationships (2002) · cites this paper as Carlson, Cicchetti, Barnett, & Braunwald, 1989
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 167
- Authors
- Carlson, V., Cicchetti, D., Barnett, D., & Braunwald, K. G.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- ORCID
- Cicchetti, Dante
- Venue
- Child Maltreatment
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1989-06-30
- Pages
- 494-528
- OpenAlex
- W1940915058
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 23.59
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
- Keywords
- infant attachment, developmental psychopathology, attachment theory, secure attachment, vulnerable children, Bowlby attachment theory, relationship formation, breakup
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