CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 652Attachment and Relationship DynamicsChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 228 of the 228 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 248 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The origins of 12-month attachment: a microanalysis of 4-month mother-infant interaction.

Open access
Beebe, Beatrice, Jaffe, Joseph, Markese, Sara, Buck, Karen, Chen, Henian, Cohen, Patricia, Bahrick, Lorraine, Andrews, Howard, Feldstein, Stanley·2010·Attachment & Human Development
DOI 10.1080/14616730903338985PMC PMC3763737
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A microanalysis of 4-month mother-infant face-to-face communication revealed a fine-grained specification of communication processes that predicted 12-month insecure attachment outcomes, particularly resistant and disorganized classifications. An urban community sample of 84 dyads were videotaped at 4 months during a face-to-face interaction, and at 12 months during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. Four-month mother and infant communication modalities of attention, affect, touch, and spatial orientation were coded from split-screen videotape on a 1 s time base; mother and infant facial-visual "engagement" variables were constructed. We used contingency measures (multi-level time-series modeling) to examine the dyadic temporal process over time, and specific rates of qualitative features of behavior to examine the content of behavior. Self-contingency (auto-correlation) measured the degree of stability/lability within an individual's own rhythms of behavior; interactive contingency (lagged cross-correlation) measured adjustments of the individual's behavior that were correlated with the partner's previous behavior. We documented that both self- and interactive contingency, as well as specific qualitative features, of mother and infant behavior were mechanisms of attachment formation by 4 months, distinguishing 12-month insecure, resistant, and disorganized attachment classifications from secure; avoidant were too few to test. All communication modalities made unique contributions. The separate analysis of different communication modalities identified intermodal discrepancies or conflict, both intrapersonal and interpersonal, that characterized insecure dyads. Contrary to dominant theories in the literature on face-to-face interaction, measures of maternal contingent coordination with infant yielded the fewest associations with 12-month attachment, whereas mother and infant self-contingency, and infant contingent coordination with mother, yielded comparable numbers of findings. Rather than the more usual hypothesis that more contingency is "better," we partially supported our hypothesis that 12-month insecurity is associated with both higher and lower 4-month self- and interactive contingency values than secure, as a function of mother vs. infant and communication modality. Thus, in the origins of attachment security, more contingency is not necessarily better. A remarkable degree of differentiation was identified in the 4-month patterns of "future" C and D infants, classified as resistant and disorganized, respectively, at 12 months. The central feature of future C dyads was dysregulated tactile and spatial exchanges, generating approach-withdrawal patterns. The intact maternal contingent coordination overall safeguards the future C infant's interactive agency. However, future C infants likely come to expect maternal spatial/tactile impingement, and to expect to "dodge" as mothers "chase." They managed maternal touch by tuning it out, sacrificing their ability to communicate about maternal touch. They "approached" by vigilantly coordinating their facial-visual engagement with maternal facial-visual engagement, but they "withdrew" by inhibiting their facial-visual engagement coordination with maternal touch. We proposed that future C infants will have difficulty feeling sensed and known during maternal spatial/tactile impingements. The central feature of future D dyads is intrapersonal and interpersonal discordance or conflict in the context of intensely distressed infants. Lowered maternal contingent coordination, and failures of maternal affective correspondence, constituted maternal emotional withdrawal from distressed infants, compromising infant interactive agency and emotional coherence. The level of dysregulation in future D dyads was thus of an entirely different order than that of future C dyads. We proposed that the future D infant represents not being sensed and known by the mother, particularly in states of distress. We proposed that the emerging internal working model of future D infants includes confusion about their own basic emotional organization, about their mothers' emotional organization, and about their mothers' response to their distress, setting a trajectory in development which may disturb the fundamental integration of the person. The findings have rich implications for clinical intervention, with remarkable specificity for different kinds of mother and infant distress. Heightened and lowered self- and interactive contingency, in different modalities, as well as the specific behavioral qualities identified, provide a more differentiated set of concepts to guide clinical intervention.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

A microanalysis of 4-month mother-infant face-to-face interaction found that self- and interactive contingency, plus specific behavioral qualities across attention, affect, touch, and spatial orientation, predicted 12-month insecure attachment—especially resistant (C) and disorganized (D) classifications. Contrary to the common “more contingency is better” view, insecurity was associated with both higher and lower 4-month contingency values depending on partner and modality.

Key findings

  • In 84 dyads, 4-month contingency analyses predicted 12-month attachment: nonB vs. B yielded 6 of 36 significant equations, C vs. B yielded 5 of 36, and D vs. B yielded 9 of 36. Avoidant (A) infants were too few to test (N = 4).
  • Maternal interactive contingency yielded the fewest associations with 12-month attachment, whereas mother and infant self-contingency and infant interactive contingency yielded comparable numbers of findings. Insecurity was linked to both heightened and lowered self- and interactive contingency, so “more contingency is not necessarily better.”
  • Future D dyads showed the most severe dysregulation: only future D infants showed simultaneous positive and negative discrepant affect (52.9% of D vs. 19.1% of B infants showed any), more vocal distress (mean 18.2% vs. 8.4% for B), and more combined facial/vocal distress (mean 21.2% vs. 10.4% for B). Their mothers showed excessive gaze away, excessive looming (50% of D mothers vs. 11.9% of B mothers), and smile/surprise during infant distress (correlated with degree of disorganization, r = .273, p = .029), plus lowered engagement and touch coordination.
  • Future C dyads showed “chase and dodge” more than B dyads (mean 46.2% vs. 21.4%, p = .025), progressively less affectionate maternal touch (p = .006), and infant inhibition of engagement/vocal coordination with maternal touch alongside heightened engagement coordination with maternal engagement.

Methods

  • Urban community sample: 152 mothers recruited at birth; 132 videotaped at 4 months; 84 returned at 12 months for the Ainsworth Strange Situation. Mothers had mean age 29 (SD 6.4); 87.4% had some college or more. Attachment distribution: 56% B (N = 47), 5% A (N = 4), 19% C (N = 16), 20% D (N = 17).
  • At 4 months, mother-infant face-to-face play without toys was videotaped; the first 2.5 uninterrupted minutes were coded on a 1s time base from split-screen video. Modalities included mother and infant gaze, facial affect, touch, spatial orientation, infant vocal affect, and composite facial-visual engagement; nine modality-pairings were analyzed.
  • Self-contingency (auto-correlation) and interactive contingency (lagged cross-correlation) were estimated with multilevel time-series models (SAS PROC MIXED; GLIMMIX for dichotomous gaze). Qualitative features were tested via ordinalized scale means and an exploratory “behavioral extremes” approach.

Limitations

  • Stated: the sample was unusual—highly educated, low avoidant prevalence (5%), high resistant (19%), and somewhat high disorganized (20%)—limiting generalizability. The multilevel time-series approach requires replication, findings were modest (about 20%–25% of equations significant for key contingency types), and effect sizes could not be assessed.
  • Stated: the behavioral extremes approach was exploratory and sensitive to exact measurement definitions; results require replication. The study examined only face-to-face behavioral transactions, excluding sleep-wake/feeding cycles, maternal states of mind, trauma history, and infant temperament.
  • Evident: attrition from 132 dyads at 4 months to 84 at 12 months was substantial, and avoidant dyads were too few to test, so conclusions center on C and D versus B classifications.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14616730903338985

Cites

228 of 228 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 248 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 434 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 291
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 133
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
382 of 382

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Contingency values of secure dyads can be considered 'optimal'.

    “we make the assumption that contingency values of secure dyads can be considered “optimal,””

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The mother has greater range, control, and flexibility than the infant.

    “The mother has greater range, control, and flexibility than the infant.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Infant distress is not uncommon in the 4-month face-to-face interaction.

    “Nevertheless, infant distress is not uncommon, yielding opportunities to observe how mother and infant manage both distress and enjoyment.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Infant procedural representations have the potential for reorganization and transformation.

    “Our view of infant procedural representations assumes the potential for reorganization and transformation (Beebe & Lachmann, 2002; Sameroff, 1983).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The separate modalities coded encompass most of what can occur in a face-to-face interaction between mothers and infants at 4 months, when infants are in an infant seat, and no toys are provided.

    “The separate modalities that we code encompass most of what can occur in a face-to-face interaction between mothers and infants at 4 months, when infants are in an infant seat, and no toys are provided.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Demographic variables and their conditional effects would not alter the basic findings.

    “Because effects of demographic variables and their conditional effects were included as a check on the assumption that these would not alter the basic findings, when these effects were not significant they were dropped from subsequent and final models.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Eye contact is arousing.

    “Because eye contact is arousing, we conjecture that both these maternal behaviors reflect concerns about visual intimacy, which may be over-arousing.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mothers of future D infants bring their own difficult attachment histories, fears regarding intimate attachments, and difficulties managing their own distress.

    “As noted above, mothers of future D infants bring their own difficult attachment histories, fears regarding intimate attachments, and difficulties managing their own distress.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Both partners actively contribute to the exchange.

    “Instead, our systems view assumes that both partners actively contribute to the exchange.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The mother has a greater range, control, and flexibility of behavior than the infant.

    “The mother obviously has a greater range, control, and flexibility of behavior than the infant.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Previous attachment research has emphasized mothers over infants and the interpersonal over the intrapersonal.

    “Previous attachment research has emphasized mothers over infants and the interpersonal over the intrapersonal.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little work has documented the role of maternal touch in the contingent process of mother and infant coordinating over time.

    “However, little work has documented the role of maternal touch in the contingent process of mother and infant coordinating over time, new to conceptualizing the origins of attachment insecurity.”
12 of 12

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Infant-touch scale is described as both significant and nonsignificant for D versus B

    Major

    The results report significantly lower mean ordinalized infant touch in future D than B infants, then state that the same comparison did not differ.

  • Reported chase-and-dodge subgroup mean exceeds its stated maximum

    Major

    The stated maximum percent time in chase and dodge is 44.7%, yet the reported mean percent time for nonB dyads is 48.4%.

  • Overall maternal negative-affect rate is below both subgroup rates

    Minor

    The reported overall rate of 34.5% cannot be lower than both the B rate of 44.0% and the nonB rate of 35.1%, because B and nonB comprise the sample.

  • Chase and dodge is called absent in D dyads despite reported occurrences

    Minor

    The paper infers that chase and dodge was absent in future D dyads, but later reports that 46.2% of those dyads showed it at least once.

  • Education categories exceed the reported "some college or more" percentage

    Minor

    The listed percentages for some college, a college degree, and post-college education sum to 91.7%, not the reported 87.4%.

    Reported 87.4 · recomputed 91.7

  • NonB subgroup counts conflict with the attachment classifications

    Minor

    The later breakdown swaps the avoidant and resistant counts while retaining the same total of 37 nonB infants.

6 of 6

Citations

Cites

Items 201–228 of 228

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. Beebe , B. , Cohen , P. M. , Bergman , A. , Moskowitz , S. , Sossin , M. Reiswig , R. in press . Mothers, infants and young children of September 11, 2001: Early years of a primary prevention project . Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy ,
  2. Beebe , B. , Hane , A. , Feldstein , S. , Jaffe , J. , Crown , C. and Markese , S. 2008c . Rhythms of dialogue at 4 and 12 months: Homotypic and heterotypic continuities, attachment and cognition Manuscript New York State Psychiatric Institute
  3. Beebe , B. and Lachmann , F. 2002 . Infant research and adult treatment: Co-constructing interactions , Hillsdale, NJ : The Analytic Press .
  4. Beebe , B. , Margolis , A. , Hane , A. A. , Bahrick , L. , Buck , K. Chen , H. 2009 . Mother–infant face-to-face self and interactive contingency across modalities: A dyadic systems view Manuscripts, NYSPI
  5. Beebe , B. , Hane , A. A. , Margolis , A. , Markese , S. , Jaffe , J. Chavarga , A. Infant self-contingency (auto-correlation) as a component of emotion regulation . International Conference on Infant Studies . March 10–14 , Baltimore, Maryland. pp. 2010
  6. Bornstein , M. 1985 . “ Infant into adult: Unity to diversity in the development of visual categorization ” . In Neonate cognition , Edited by: Mehler , J. and Fox , R. 115 – 138 . Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc .
  7. Bretherton , I. and Munholland , K. 1999 . “ Internal working models in attachment: A construct revisited ” . In Handbook of attachment theory , 89 – 111 . New York : Guilford .
  8. Cassidy , J. and Kobak , R. 1988 . “ Avoidance and its relation to other defensive process ” . In Clinical implications of attachment , Edited by: Belsky , J. and Nezworski , T. 300 – 323 . Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum .
  9. Cohn , J. and Beebe , B. 1990 . Sampling interval affects time-series regression estimates of mother–infant influence . Infant Behavior and Development, Abstracts Issue , 13 : 317
  10. Demetriades , H. 2003 . Maternal anxiety and maternal spatial proximity in 4-month mother–infant face-to-face interaction Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Long Island University, CW Post Campus
  11. Downing , G. 2004 . “ Emotion, body and parent–infant interaction ” . In Emotional development: Recent research advances , Edited by: Nadel , J. and Muir , D. 429 – 449 . Oxford : Oxford University Press .
  12. Dunham , P. and Dunham , F. 1994 . “ Optimal social structures and adaptive infant development ” . In Joint attention: Its origins and role in development , Edited by: Moore , C. and Dunham , P. 159 – 188 . Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum .
  13. Fox , N. 1994 . The development of emotion regulation . Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development , 59 ( 2–3 ) Serial No. 240
  14. Gergely , G. and Watson , J. 1996 . The social biofeedback model of parental affect-mirroring . International Journal of Psycho-Analysis , 11 : 1181 – 1212 .
  15. Gianino , A. and Tronick , E. 1988 . “ The mutual regulation model: The infant's self and interactive regulation coping and defense ” . In Stress and Coping , Edited by: Field , T. , McCabe , P. and Schneiderman , N. 47 – 68 . Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum .
  16. Gottman , J. 1979 . Marital interactions , New York : Academic Press .
  17. Gottman , J. 1981 . Time-series analysis , Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
  18. Hamilton , V. 1985 . “ John Bowlby: An ethological basis for psychoanalysis ” . In Beyond Freud: A study of modern psychoanalytic theorists , Edited by: Reppen , J. 1 – 28 . Hillsdale, NJ : Analytic Press .
  19. Hentel , A. , Beebe , B. and Jaffe , J. Maternal depression at 6 weeks is associated with infant self-comfort at 4 months . Poster presented at the International Conference of Infant Studies . Brighton, UK.
  20. Hodges , S. and Wegner , D. 1997 . “ Automatic and controlled empathy ” . In Empathic accuracy , Edited by: Ickes , W. 311 – 339 . New York : Guilford Press .
  21. Izard , C. 1979 . The Maximally Discriminative Facial Action Coding System , (MAX), , Newark : University of Delaware Instructional Resources Center .
  22. Jacobvitz , D. , Hazen , N. and Riggs , S. Disorganized mental processes in mothers: Frightening/frightened caregiving and disoriented, disorganized behavior in infancy . Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development . Washington, DC.
  23. Jaffe , J. , Beebe , B. , Feldstein , S. , Crown , C. and Jasnow , M. 2001 . Rhythms of dialogue in infancy . Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development , 66 ( 2 ) Serial No. 264, 1–132
  24. Kelly , K. , Ueng-McHale , J. , Grienenberger , J. and Slade , A. Atypical maternal behavior and their relation to infant attachment disorganization . Poster session presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development . Tampa, Florida.
  25. Kushnick , G. 2002 . Maternal spatial intrusion patterns in mother–infant face-to-face play: Maternal dependency, depression, and mother–infant chase and dodge Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Long Island University
  26. Langhorst , B. and Fogel , A. Cross-validation of microanalytic approaches to face-to-face interaction . Paper presented at the International Conference on Infant Studies . Austin, TX.
  27. Lupi , T. 2009 . Second by second maternal management of 4-month infant gaze aversion: A quantification of “good enough mothering” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University School of Social Work
  28. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0355(199623) · DOI
  29. Lyons-Ruth , K. and Jacobvitz , D. 2008 . “ Disorganized attachment: Genetic factors, parenting contexts, and developmental transformation from infancy to adulthood ” . In Handbook of attachment: Theory, research and clinical applications , 2nd ed , Edited by: Cassidy , J. and Shaver , P. 666 – 697 . New York : Guilford Press .
  30. 10.1037//0022-0006X.64.2.264 · DOI
  31. Markese , S. , Beebe , B. , Feldstein , S. and Jaffe , J. 2008 . Rhythms of dialogue in infancy and attachment narratives in childhood . Paper presented at the International Conference Infant Studies . March 2008 , Vancouver, Canada.
  32. Meltzoff , A. 1985 . “ The roots of social and cognitive development: Models of man's original nature ” . In Social perception in infants , Edited by: Field , T. and Fox , N. 1 – 30 . Norwood, NJ : Ablex .
  33. Meltzoff , A. and Moore , M. 1998 . “ Infant intersubjectivity: Broadening the dialogue to include imitation, identity and intention ” . In Intersubjective communication and emotion in early ontogeny , Edited by: Braten , S. 47 – 62 . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
  34. Millar , W. 1988 . Smiling, vocal and attentive behavior during social contingency learning in seven and ten month old infants . Merrill Palmer Quarterly , 34 : 301 – 325 .
  35. Miller , J. 2010 . Anamolous maternal behaviour at four months and infant attachment disorganization at one year Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York
  36. Murray , L. and Trevarthen , C. 1985 . “ Emotional regulation of interactions between two-month-olds and their mothers ” . In Social perception in infants , Edited by: Field , T. and Fox , N. 177 – 197 . Norwood, NJ : Ablex .
  37. Pine , F. 1981 . In the beginning: Contributions to a psychoanalytic developmental psychology . International Review of Psycho-Analysis , 8 : 15 – 33 .
  38. Sameroff , A. 1983 . “ Developmental systems: Contexts and evolution ” . In Mussen's handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1 , Edited by: Kessen , W. 237 – 294 . New York : Wiley .
  39. Sander , L. 1977 . “ The regulation of exchange in the infant–caretaker system and some aspects of the context-content relationship ” . In Interaction, conversation, and the development of language , Edited by: Lewis , M. and Rosenblum , L. 133 – 156 . New York : Wiley .
  40. Slade , A. , Dermer , M. , Gerber , J. , Gibson , L. , Graf , F. Siegel , N. Prenatal representation, dyadic interaction and quality of attachment . Paper presented at the biennial meetings of the Society for Research in Child Development . Indianapolis, Indiana.
  41. Solomon , J. and George , C. 1999 . “ The measurement of attachment security in infancy and childhood ” . In Handbook of attachment: Theory, research and clinical applications , Edited by: Cassidy , J. and Shaver , P. 287 – 316 . New York : Guilford .
  42. Stepakoff , S. 1999 . Mother–infant tactile communication at four months: Effects of infant gender, maternal ethnicity, and maternal depression Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. John's University, New York
  43. Stepakoff , S. , Beebe , B. and Jaffe , J. Infant gender, maternal touch, and ethnicity . Paper presented at the International Conference on Infant Studies . Brighton, England.
  44. Stepakoff , S. , Beebe , B. and Jaffe , J. 2008 . Mother–infant tactile communication at four months: The roles of infant gender, maternal ethnicity, and maternal depression Manuscript, New York State Psychiatric Institute, submitted for publication
  45. Stern , D. , Hofer , L. , Haft , W. and Dore , J. 1985 . “ Affect attunement: The sharing of feeling states between mother and infant by means of intermodal fluency ” . In Social perception in infants , Edited by: Field , T. and Fox , N. Norwood, NJ : Ablex .
  46. Tobias , K. 1995 . The relation between maternal attachment and patterns of mother–infant interaction at four months Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York
  47. Tronick , E. and Weinberg , M. 1990 . The infant regulatory scoring system Unpublished manuscript, Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
  48. Watson , J. 1985 . Contingency perception in early social development. In T. Field & N. Fox (Eds.) . Social perception in infants , : 157 – 176 .
  49. Weinberg , M.K. 1992 . Sex differences in emotional expression and affective regulation in 6-month-old infants . Pediatric Research , 32 ( 4, Part 2 ) : 15A
  50. Weinberg , K. and Tronick , E. Stability of infant social and coping behaviors and affective displays between 6 and 15 months: Age-appropriate tasks and stress bring out stability . Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development . Seattle, Washington.
  51. Weiss , P. 1970 . Whither life or science? . American Scientist , 8 : 156 – 163 .
  52. Zelner , S. , Beebe , B. and Jaffe , J. The organization of vocalization and gaze in early mother–infant interactive regulation . Paper presented at the meeting of the International Conference Infant Studies . New York.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 652

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Beebe, B., Jaffe, J., Markese, S., Buck, K., Chen, H., Cohen, P., Bahrick, L., Andrews, H., & Feldstein, S.
Affiliations
New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Beebe, Beatrice
ORCID
Venue
Attachment & Human Development
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2010-01
Volume
12
Issue
1-2
Pages
3-141
ISSN
  • 1461-6734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-2988
DOI
10.1080/14616730903338985
PMC
PMC3763737
OpenAlex
W2103833506
Semantic Scholar
7dc57fc3ca53aa3d8f37549801275374c566570c
Cited by
652
References
228
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 27
FWCI
41.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Attachment & Human Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Florida International University Digital Commons (Florida International University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH56130, R01MH056130)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD053776)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
attachment formation, mother-infant interaction, insecure attachment, resistant attachment, disorganized attachment, face-to-face communication, spatial orientation, approach-withdrawal, Ainsworth Strange Situation, dyadic interaction, early infancy, attachment avoidance
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child Development, Child Rearing, Female, Humans, Infant, Mother-Child Relations, Object Attachment, Videotape Recording, Young Adult

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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