Editorial
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined the degree of overlap and sources of discrepancies between two alternative models of social cognition in early adolescence, a general model based on 'theory of mind' and a relationship-specific model rooted in attachment theory. METHODS: We administered newly developed, age-appropriate measures of advanced theory of mind or 'mentalising' and child-parent attachment, indexed by the coherence of children's narratives about attachment relationships, to a sample of 70 early adolescents (mean age 12.6 years). RESULTS: The central findings were that, as expected, there was significant overlap between the mentalising and attachment indices of social cognition (r(70) = .35, p < .01). The overlap was not significantly mediated by verbal ability or general measures of parenting. There were also substantial discrepancies in children's performance on these measures that were conceptually interesting and statistically reliable. Specifically, adolescent reports of parenting discriminated between measures of mentalising and attachment coherence. In addition, those children who exhibited a less coherent model of attachment than was predicted from performance on a mentalising task were more likely to be rated as exhibiting a 'Dismissing/Avoidant' style in the attachment interview. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support a connection between mentalising and attachment in early adolescence, and further suggest that social cognitive processes may be context and relationship…
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?
General and relationship-specific mentalization, although overlapping, appear to be distinct.
“First, general and relationship-specific mentalization, although overlapping, appear to be distinct (Happe ´ & Frith, 1996; Humfress, O'Connor, Slaughter, Target, & Fonagy, 2002; O'Connor & Hirsch, 1999)”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Humfress, O'Connor, Slaughter, Target, & Fonagy, 2002
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 42 · Cited by 74
- Authors
- Happé, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-09-18
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 475-476
- ISSN
- 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7610
- OpenAlex
- W2006883224
- Cited by
- 74
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Keywords
- theory of mind, mentalization, attachment theory, social cognition, early adolescence, parent-child attachment, attachment interview, parenting, verbal ability
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Psychology, Adolescent, Child, Cognition, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Object Attachment, Parent-Child Relations, Social Behavior, Students, Urban Population, Parenting
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