OTE eon Core E obOTsSO OO th Child—Parent Attachment and Children’s Peer Relations: A Quantitative Review Barry H. Schneider University of Ottawa Lestie Atkinson Centre for Addition and Mental Health Christine Tardif University of Toronto “The central premise ofatachment theory is thatthe security ofthe ealychild-parent bond is reflected in the cil's interpersonal relationshis cross the fe pan. This meta-analysis was based on 63 studies that reported correlations Berween child-parent tachment and clden's pect relations. The overall tffect size (ES) for child-mother tachment was in the smallo-moderate range and was quite ‘homogencous. ESs were similar in stds that featured the Stange Siwation and Q-yrt methods. The cefecs were larger for peer relations in idle cildhood and adolescence than fr pee relations in erly ctildhood. BSs were also higher for studies that focusd on chilren's close friendships rather than on ‘elations with other pers. Gender and cultural differences in ESs were minimal The results forthe fe dies on father hid attachment were inconclusive Bowlby (1969) proposed thatthe infant constructs models ofthe ‘world, significant persons within it, and the self. These internal ‘working models, ot states of mind that guide behavior, become rote sophisticated with age and are applied to the child's broad ‘ening social world. On the basis of these models, the child predicts the behavior of others and makes motivational attributions, Al- though internal working models are amenable 10 change with change in the environment, they cannot be modified easily. This is because they involve intrinsically conservative expectancies (later ‘experience is interpreted in light of earlier experience) and because these expectancies influence behavior such that expectations are confirmed, or atleast not disconfirmed (eg, someone who expects rebuff may invite it, thereby confirming expectations, or she oF he may avoid interaction, thereby precluding disconfirmation of expectations). Models of others’ behavior are Brought from the home and may resist change even when they do not accurately, reflect the reality of new playmates. However, several investigators have questioned the theory ink- ing attachment security to subsequent child adjustment. Grusee Barry H. Scheider, Schoo! of Prychology, Univer of Onawa, OF ‘awa, Ontario, Canada; Leslie Atkinson, Cente for Addiction and Meats eat, Toronto, nario, Canada; Cristie Tari, Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, (Ontario, Canada ‘his study was fanded bythe Ontario Mental Health Foundation We acknowledge te assistance of Simon Wiliams and Drew Dane in the coding of the study features and the helpful suggestions of Ruth ‘Sharabany, Avi Sagi, David Oppenicim, and Ofra Mayseless. The suppor. of many colleages in providing data to supplement those availble in published soures is also gratefully acknowledged. CComespondence coceming this arcle should be addressed to Bary H. Schaeider, School of Psychology, University of Onawe, Orava, Ontario, Canada KiN 6NS. Electronic mail may be seat to bay @ustawa.cs. 6 and Lytton (1988) queried the assumption that atachment acts ‘causally. They speculated that atachment is an indicator of the child's overall resilience and adjustment, which may have other sources. Hinde (1988) argued thatthe construct of internal working models has become a catchall explanation of stability within tachment theory. Hinde suggested that other, nonattachment con- structs, such as temperament, might serve this purpose equally well (sce also Kagan, 1995) and that no convincing evidence exists for the eausal role, or even the existence, of internal working ‘models, Remarking thatthe empirical support for atachment falls short of theory-based expectation, Lewis and Feiring (1989) ar- ‘gued that theorists fail to consider important socialization agents other than parents that influence children’s social relationships Belsky and Cassidy (1995) concluded that “the notion of internal ‘working models as the causal process explaining the associations between attachment security and the developmental sequelae re ‘mains a useful interpredive heuristic in need of empirical evalus tion” (p. 383) ‘Basic data onthe strength ofthe association between attachment security and peer relations are a prerequisite to the resolution of, this controversy. Quantitative synthesis of research results facili tates the objective comparison of results across studies that have used a common metic. It is particularly useful in synthesizing results when there ae a substantial number of studies but modest ‘sample sizes in each, asin the case of the present meta-analysis ‘The provision of such an estimate was the first purpose of this, ‘meta-analysis. The derivation of an overall effect size (ES), how ‘ever, represents only the starting point of this meta-analysis. To ‘avoid the pitfalls of “combining multiple studies involving spe- Citic, exotic, and diverse procedures, participants, and hypotheses and then generalizing to people in general” (Lepper, Henderiong, ‘& Gingras, 1999, p. 671), we discuss the specifies of particular ‘studies ina narative format when there are few studies addressing[ATTACHMENT AND PEER RELATIONS. 87 1 panicularly relevant hypothesis or population and especially when samples ate small or procedures awed. Potential Moderating Factors ‘The second purpose of ths meta-analysis was to identify vari- ables that moderate the relation between attachment security and Peer relations, Many possible moderating factors exist. Assessment of Attachment ‘Most studies of attachment and peer relations have relied on Ainsworth and Wittig’s (1969) Strange Situation to measure at tachment security. Lamb and Nash (1989) argued that this Iabo- ratory tsk lacks ecological validity. Clarke Stewart (1989) and ‘Thompson (1988) argued that independent behavior inthe Strange Sitwation has been mistakenly interpreted as (insecure) avoidance of the caregiver ‘The second commonly used measure of attachment in this literature is the Attachment Q-set (Waters & Deane, 1985). De- signed as an ecologically valid alternative tothe Strange Situation, the Artachment Q-set involves observation of the caegiver-child dyad in and around the home. However, one might wonder ‘whether the instrument truly measures attachment behavior (which, js a response to stressful circumstances, such as are incorporated into the Swange Situation) or whether it measures some corr late(s) of that behavior. The Quset provides a continuous metic representing the degree to which a relationship i secure. However, it has been argued that attachment theory pertains to quality of attachment, not quantity (Ainsworth, Blchar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). On the other hand, the continuous metric ofthe Attachment Qset may provide more statistical power than the categorical metric of the Strange Situation, For whatever reasons, meta analytic results indicate only’ modest convergence between the Attachment Q-set and the Strange Situation (r = .26; van Wzen- door, Vereijken, & Ridsen-Walraven, in press) Tavestigators have also developed a variety of other techniques (o assess attachment security. Cassidy and Marvin (1992) and Crittenden (1988) developed separation-reunion systems for pre- schoolers, although Goldberg, Washington, et al. (1999) ques- tioned the continuity of the former with respect to infant attach ‘ment classifications. Bretherton, Ridgeway, and Cassidy (1990) constructed a dol story play task for preschoolers, bur the task may rot te well suited to clinical samples (Greenberg, De- Kiyen, Speltz, & Endriga, 1997). George, Keplan, and Main (1996) developed the Adult Attachment faverview, bat it may have limitations where adolescents are concerned (Cobb, 1996). This, proliferation of attachment instruments, many with putative short: comings, suggests the need for a comparative and integrative approach to the literature. Assessment of Peer Relations Most of the major instruments for assessing children’s peer relations have been used in attachment studies, including socio- metres, direct observation, and reports from parents and teachers, In addition, some studies have included self-report measures of peer relations, which are of questionable validity as measures of actual social behavior, especially in the ease of youngsters with cextemaizing disorders (Kupersmidt & Patterson, 1991). The var- fous assessment methods vary greatly in terms of validity and reliability; they often provide divergent pictures of the same child's peer relations (eg. Bierman & Welsh, 1997) Virtually every conceivable aspect of peer relations has been included in attachment research, but itis not clear that all are equally relevant. Admittedly, there are “broad” views of attack- ment (see discussion by Thompson, 1998) according to which child-parent atachment could be expected to predict many if not, ‘most aspects of children’s cognitive and social development, in contrast to “narrow” views in which child-parent attachment is, assumed to predict ony close, intimate relationships. Nevertheless, ‘even the broad views of attachment do not provide any basis for assuming that all aspects of social development willbe affected to the same extent ‘Accordingly, the most meaningful contrast that could emerge from a synthesis ofthe literature is between measures of friendship and measures of peer relations in larger groups. This contention is, consistent with the relationship perspective (eg, Belsky & Cassidy, 1995; Hinde, 1979; Sroufe & Feeson, 1986; Waters & Sroufe, 1983) that advocates going beyond conceptualizatons of social competence in terms of constructs that pertain mostly to large-group interaction, such as popularty/ejection (Belsky & Cassidy, 1995; Fox, 1995; Kems, 1994; Shulman, 1995). These theorists argue thatthe intense, intimate experience of family life is more closely associated with the child's success in forming intense, intimate relationships with friends. On the basis of their ‘qualitative review, for example, Belsky and Cassidy (1995) con- cluded, "In thinking about the sequela of attachment security there seems fo be a clear need to distinguish intimacy or intimacy- like relations from mere sociability” (p. 394). ‘This argument implies that the influence of attachment on relationships must be summarized separately from its impact on social exchanges with peers who are not close fiends, and that time-Lagged correlations should be compared with concurrent cor- relations between attachment and social relations. Sroufe (1988) implored theorists to respect the boundaries of atachment theory in making predictions about children's functioning in later life. He argued for limiting predictions to such domains as inner con dence, self-worth, and intimacy and closeness in interpersonal relationships. There i a growing consensus that both acceptance in large groups and involvement in satistying close relationships have implications for adjustment, though possibly in different ways (Asher, Parker, & Walker, 1996). Pechaps, as Sullivan (1953) theorized, interaction with intimate friends daring childhood and adolescence provides the best foundation for satisfying, close relationships later on, ‘We are not suggesting that attachment security is unrelated to aspects of social competence other than intimacy in close friend ship. Social competencies in large groups and in close reltion~ ships are conceptually and empirically related First, acceptance in 4 large group expands the network of potential fiends, thereby increasing the opportunity to form intimate friendships. Popularity affords friendship (Bukowski, Pizzamiglio, Newcomb, & Hoza, 1996), Second, success in socal relations atthe large-group level requires some of the same skills as are involved in forming and ‘maintaining close fiendships. Bukowski etal. discussed some of these common skills; they emphasized the ability to resolve con- ict, to share postive affect, and to reciprocate iking. Some of88 SCHNEIDER, ATKINSON, AND TARDIF these elements, especially the exchange of postive affect and of sentiments of liking are important elements of early parent-child ‘bonds and thus may relate to early attachment security, However, there sre important differences in addition to the commonalities between the constructs, especially with regard to the exchange of intimacy, which is central in friendship but not in popularity Hence, the working model for relationships that is based on the figst intimate relationship should be most (although not uniquely) relevant to Inter imimate relationships, such as close friendship. ‘Obstacles to global peer acceptance may also be impediments to intimacy in close relationships. Aggression and shyness/with- drawal ae the major obstacles to peer acceptance. Attachment can bbe seen as an antecedent to both. As noted by Troy and Sroufe (1987), children with insecure “avoidant” parents may expect hostility from others and relate to peers on the basis of that ‘expectation with preemptive displays of hostility. According to Rubia, LeMare, and Lolis (1990), such avoidant attachment pat- tems are more likely to arise under adverse “setting conditions,” sch asthe child being of a difficult temperament or the mother being socially isolated and/or under financial stress. The interper- sonal aggression that arises from expectations of hostility should logically affect both close and casual social relationships. How- ever, itis logical to expect thatthe hostility is transferred most directly from the parent-child relationship tothe peer relationship ‘most similar to it—namely, the bond between close friends. Fur- thermore, aggressive behavior alienaes peers (Asher & Coie, 1990), which restricts the network of potential friends. Aggressive children tend to form relationships with other aggressive children (Dishion, Andrews, & Crosby, 1995); these friendships between antisocial children and youth are often superficial ones lacking in intimacy (Selman & Schultz, 1990). “The same reasoning applies to social withdrawal. Infants who display insecure, ambivalent pattems of atachment expect 10 be rejected by orhers, They remain passive in peer contexts in order to avoid rejection (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998). This am- ‘valent partem is seen as more probable i the child is biologically predisposed to become less aroused in novel social situations and if the family system is already vulnerable because of external stresses (e.g, unemployment) and/or inadequate provision of so cial support (Rubin et al., 1990). From early adolescence on, shyness or withdrawal alienate peers (Hodgens & McCoy, 1989). ‘This alienation restricts the pool of candidates for close friend ships; signs of social withdrawal are evident in relationships with close friends as well as in large-group social interaction, For example, withdrawn children are less talkative and less competi- tive with their fiends than are nonwithdrawn children (Schneider, 1999), Thus, there are reasons to believe that child-parentattach- ment may affect many aspects of children’s social transactions with peers who are not close friends. Furthermore, acceptance or rejection in large groups and the behaviors (eg. aggression and social withdrawal) that may lead to acceptance or rejection may function as regulators of access 10 close friendships. Although there may be reasons why attachment may differentially affect such variables as popularity, aggression, and social withdrawal, we ocus herein on what we consider the most important distinction from conceptual standpoint: the comparison of more and less intimate relationships. ‘The major tools of pecr-telations research—namely, observa- tion, sociometrics, and third-party ratings—can all be used to measure both general peer acceptance and close friendships, but, their content would differ dramatically. For example, direct obsr- ‘ations of children's pay during recess hae beea used 10 quanti frequency or duration of contacts with peers in comparison with frequency or duration ofsltary ply. 1s also possible, although not always ety, ouse direct observation to asess such aspects of intimate fiendship as mutual affection, emotional suppor, and intimacy, even in young children (Howes, 1996). Unforunatly, such direct observation has ot typically been used in studies of attachment and peer relations, perhaps because many ofthe erica moments in friendship occur out of range of observations technology “Thee are developmental ferences inthe relative importance ot many of the salient features of fiendship. Hary Stak Sullivan, who emphasized the pivotal importance of intimate ficodship for Psyehouocial development, argued forthe importance of fiendship 4 only one petiod of development: right before and during ado- rescence (Bern, 1996, Sullivan, 1953). It is ifficut, though possible, to assess affection and intimacy in the fiendships of young. cildren, but dei Gendships axe not characterized by mutual emotional suppor, self-disclosure, oF Fequent expressions of sceptance (Howes, 1996). The exchange of intimacy is ac- Anowledged in children's comments aboot thei rendships from preadolescence on (Berndt, Hawkins, & Hoyle, 1986); it becomes the cenral feature of friendship only in adolescence (Aboud & Mendelson, 1996; Clark, Mil, & Corcoran, 1989). The diferen- tiation between friendship and social interactions with nonfiends is the central distinction of this ale. We also investigated Several other variables that may serve t© moderate the relation tetvoen attachment security and peer elation, as described inthe following sections. Gender of Parent and Child Because of the mother’s primary caregiving role in Western societies, one might expect that child-mother attachment is of greater consequence for future relationships (Belsky, 1996). Nev- ‘ertheless, iti possible that the quality of father-child atachment is strongly related to children's social relations, especially for boys in the preschool and ealy sehool yeas, when same-sex friendships are the norm (e.g, Daniels-Beimess, 1989). ‘Age at Assessment Age at assessment of both attachment and peer relations may be important. With respect to attachment, theorists have argued that internal working models become more stable with age (Bowlby, 1969). De Wolff and van Bzendoorn (1997) offered this argument as an explanation for their meta-analytic finding that the ES linking maternal sensitivity to attachment security is stronger in ‘older than in younger samples (although the explanation has been ‘questioned; see Atkinson eta, 2000). On te basis of such theory and data, one would expect thatthe later attachment is assessed, the more predictive of subsequent peer relations it would be Further as introduced earlier, the aspects of friendship that parallel ‘most diretly many of the central features of secure atiachiment— specially intimacy, security, and trst—do not emerge as major «dimensions of children’s peer relationships until preadolescence and adolescence.ATTACHMENT AND PEER RELATIONS 89 Time Between Assessments of Attachment ‘and Peer Relations Given strong claims made about the long-term effects of attach- iment quality e.g, Bowiby, 1973), i is important to consider the strength of associations between measures of attachment and peer relations as a function of the time lapse between them. Bowiby's, theory implies that disturbances of early atachment are reflected in relationships over the entire life course, though it eraphasizes that favorable experiences in later years may mitigate the negative effects of early attachment problems and vice versa (Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985; van Hzendoora & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 1997), Accordingly, longitudinal data spanning several develop- meatal stages provide more convincing support ofthe theory than 4do concurrent correlations between attachment and peer relations. Nevertheless, Youngblade, Park, and Belsky (1993) speculated ‘Gat correlations might be higher in studies featuring concurrent assessment of attachment and peer relations, which represent the effects of the child-parent relationship atthe time it was measured rather than the effects of the child-parent bond as it was years, carier. Risk Status Many longitudinal studies in attachment have been faulted for heir use of nonrepresentative, middle-class samples (Lamb & Nash, 1989), although some studies of attachment and peer rela. tions have been conducted with panicipants of lower socioeco- nomic status (SES; eg, Troy & Sroufe, 1987). Many protective aspects of middle-class homes may attenuate the sequelae of early attachment insecurity (e., Bates, Maslin, & Frankel, 1985; Bel- sky, Rosenberger, & Cmic, 1995). Therefore, it would be useful ‘compare the effects of attachment on peer relations for samples slitfering in SES. Beyond low SES, several studies involve samples at risk for psychiatric disorder and the children of parents who have psychi atric diagnoses. The question arises as to the comparative impact ‘of tachment in vulnerable child populations versus low-risk populations. Furthermore, it would be heuristically useful to es- lablish the relative contribution of underlying relationship distur- Dances to disorders that are diverse in phenomenology (Rutter, 1995). In addition to nonclinical populations, data are available regarding children refered for psychiatric services (Wright, Bin- ‘ney, & Smith, 1995) and for children with known risk factors such 1s a history of maltreatment (Lyons-Ruth, Alper, & Repacholi, 1993) and low bith weight (Rose-Krasnor, Rubin, Booth, & Coplan, 1996). Culture ‘Concepts of attachment-related secure-base behavior are appli- cable in diverse cultures (Waters, Vaughn, Posada, & Kondo- ‘kemura, 1995) butt isnot clear that attachment is equally crucial to children’s peer relationships in all culture, In many cultures, for example, siblings, extended family members, and neighbors are ‘more active in child socialization than they are in North America (Stanton, 1995). Hence, one might expect that child-parentatach- ‘ment might be more predictive of peer relations in North American ‘samples than in samples in which the child-rearing responsibility is shared more diversly. Integrative Challenges “There has been little attempt to integrate Findings i the litera- ture that address atachment and peer relations. Quite apart from the disparate approaches outlined above, or perhaps because ofthis, diversity, there ate apparent contradictions in the literature that have never been addressed. For example, some investigators te= ported significant associations between attachment security and later interaction with unfamiliar age-mates (Pastor, 1981) and adults (Main & Weston, 1981; Plunkett, Klein, & Meisels, 1988). Other studies failed t0 show significant associations between at tachment security and interaction with unfamiliar peers (Jacobson, & Wille, 1986) and adults (Frodi, 1983; Lamb, Hwang, Frodi, & Frodi, 1982; Thompson & Lamb, 1984). No attempt has been made to reconcile these inconsistencies. This integrative failure also manifests ina lack of even basic strategies for organizing the literature, Belsky and Cassidy (1995) observed, for example, “In ‘view of the fact that attachment theory is a theory about the ‘characteristics, consequences, and determinants of close relation Ships, it is surprising that efforts to conduct or even review research linking attachment history and social development have ‘ot attended to distinctions among the partners (eg, familiar vs. ‘unfamiliar peers) whose interactions with children are being stud> ied” (p. 393). Meta-analytic techniques are ideal for resolving such ‘Our major hypotheses were (a) that de overall BS for studies on the link between child-parent attachment and children's peer re~ lations would be significantly different from zero, (b) thatthe ES ‘would be significantly larger in studies of close friendships than in studies focusing on less intimate peer relationships, and (c) that the ESs would be larger in studies conducted with participants in riddle childhood and adolescence than in studies conducted with preschoolers. In addition, we explored the other distinctions out- Tined above Method Retrieval of Studies ‘We conducted computerized searches of Psyc IT, MedLine, and Dis- senation Absticts Intemtional to locate relevant studies that appeared ‘pemeen 1970 and 1998. We ured the following Keywords in diferent combinations: tachment, chlid-masher interaction, chld-parent rela tions, peertoeal competence, interpersonal interaction. friendship, and eer relations. We alo scanned manually the abstracts ofthe Society for Research in Child Development and the Iterationl Conference of Infant Studies as well asthe mote recent ses of Child Development, Devel ‘mental Psychology, Paychological Review, ad Psychological Bulletin 10 naire the incision of stosies that had not yet been inched the ‘Sompuerized databases, Finally, we seach the reference lists of each tile that had been setieved Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria ‘Te serch procedures goneraed approximately 200 sees. Given tis substantial number, we imposed relatively stringent inclusion extra. To ‘be incloed, sadly ad to (a) dese orginal daa; () inetd a measure of atachinest to a parent, eter than self-report, that was (c)coleted90, ‘SCHNEIDER, ATKINSON, AND TARDIF before the ctild reached age 18; () include a quantiative measure of children’s per rlations that was oter than selé-epot () feature asess- ‘ment of etachment security and children's per clans before age 18; () inlude dat on both securely and insecurely atached purtcipans ox & ‘continuous measure of tachment; and (g) be writen in English or another language understod by a member of our research team (French, Ilan Spanish). sis meating these xtra did not include sufficient data for ital analysis, we contacted the authors. Additonal data were received from 19 of the 32 authors comcted Tt smne cases, the sume data were reported n ote than oe ablation “To avoid duplication, we wed the mote receat publication and added any dua from the ealier versions that were not inchided. In thee other instances, more than one pblication described the same longitudinal sty, but the articles published after the fist ne contained reports of new follow-up daa. Two of these stuies featured two follow-ap points each, for total of four articles. Another longtudinn! study by Sroufe and colleagues was reported in nine different publications covering nine df= ferent follow-up points, We fli was inportat not to assign dspropor- thonate weight to thes thre lngtiinalstades in computing the overall, ES, Therefore, the data erating tall follow-up points were combined in thoaecalelations. However, we considered it ee meaningful when calculating BSS for specific age groups and fr specific types of measures to separate the data peraning to diferent follow-up poins within these thre longitudinal sais. Therefore in those ancillary analyses, the mit ber of effects exceeds the numberof stuties. ‘Siny-thes stad, witha combined sample of 3.10 children, met the ‘inclusion entra. An independent graduate esearch assistant, not involved ‘in any other aspect of the coding or analyses, corte the ales in the ‘rigial poo to establish inet relabtty regarding inclusion decison. He agreed with 98% ofthe origital rates’ decisions Disaprements Were resolved by consensus. “Although sides were excledd fora variety of reasons, our criteria led to the systematic exclusion of one relatively coherent group of adie ht ‘were conducted with adolescents and that usd slf-epons of bth atc ‘ment and peer relations. Despite ther heuristic vale, those sis ae Timed Because the findings may be inflated by shared meted variance Coding of Study Features Each stady was code om (a) atachment measure (eg, Stange Situation oe Q-sort this feature was also expanded o include a categorization of al fudis as employing iter dichotomous of contiagous atachment mea- ‘ures: source of information uboutchilen's peer rations eg diet observation, per reor, teicher repo) (e) dimensions) of per relations considered (eg. peer-drected aggression, per-iected withdrawal, qua ity of friendship 2 familiarity of play partners to focal child participants (Ge, fiends, unfamiliar pers.) (€information aout cose feendships (existence, stabiity, quality, whether information was available about the characteristics of the fiend or his or her attachment With pares): () tender of eild and parent participants; () mean age of participants when tttachiment and (h) peer relations were measured, () time beeen the ‘measurement of atachment and peer relatos: (risk stats ofthe sample (e.g, low SES, parents with payciati disorder (publication dare; and (0) dissemination medium (ie, journal article, thesis, conference presen ‘akon. A second coder independently casi bathe stadies. The kappa ‘oeficient for otra liability exceeded 80 fo sch ofthe categories. Calculation of Effect Sizes ‘Weighted ES correlations (s) were computed with Sehwarzr's (1988) smecaanalyic software. When necessary. we calulaed estimates of r ‘irecily using means and stundard deviations repored in the origina! lctcles or sophie by the authors. The ES used in the analyses petit ‘iferences im poet relations between ciléen classified as Securely and insecurly ataced, Results reported as nonsignificant and unaccompanied by relevant test sists accounted for 28% of the total numberof ES and ame from 38% ofthe studies In these cases, we substituted the mean ES of nonsignificant resuls that were reponed within the dataset, r= 07, based on 84 Ss from 36 sudies. We believe tis is preferable to Rosenbual's (1984) suggestion of cubeiuting an estimate based on p = 50, which would also Astor findings because af he inclusion of ESs that wre considerably lower than thote typically found inthis Meature for nonsignificant effects [Neverieles, we report mean ESs based on both Rosentha's practice and the method we propose "To avoid assigning disproportionate influence to studies that included tnuliple measures of tachment andlor peer relations, we averaged ESS ‘within each study o yield a single corelation forthe assessment of overall “strength of the relationship between attachment and por relations. How= ‘ver, in many ofthe analyses performed to idenfy moderators of ESS, we Allowed the umber of ESe to exceed the mumber of studies. This was recesary, for example, to compare the ES: fo the various aspects and measures of socal competence Because multiple measures of soil com- tence were inhided im sos ll of the studies. Results Attachment to Mothers Overall Predictive Strength ‘The average global ES was 20 (SE = 16). This effect is significantly different from zero (Z = 11.91, p <.001). Rosenthal ‘and Rubin's (1982) binomial ES display suggests that if secure attachment were a treatment and if peer relations had a dichoto- ‘mous outcome (successful vs. unsuccessful), then 59% of securely attached children would have successful peer relations compared with 41% of those insecurely atached. The fail-safe m indicates that 165 addtional studies (2.6 times the number of studies iden- tified in this meta-analysis) with nonsignificant results would be needed to reduce the overall ES to the jus-significant level. This figure (165) falls short of Rosenthal’s (1991) critical value, ‘5k + 10 (which equals in this case, 325). Therefore, we eannot be reasonably sure tha the significance ofthe effect under consider- ation will not be negated by as yet unpublished null findings. The ‘mean ES would drop to .16 if calculated according to Rosenthal’s convention of estimating the ESs for unspecified nonsignificant findings at p = .50; it would increase to 27 if undetailed nonsig- nificant effects were deleted. (Chi-square tests indicated that the ES distribution was homoge- neous, x°(62, N= 63) = 688, ns; this was confirmed by disjoint cluster analysis, which indicated that all ESs except fora single outlier chi-square (Troy & Sroufe, 1987, r = .69) were part of a Single cluster (p <_.05). This is best interpreted as indicating that the ESs can be teated as estimates of the same parameter, with sampling error the most likely explanation for differences among. estimates (Cooper & Hedges, 1994, p. 432). Nevertheless, we followed the injunction of Johason, Mullen, and Salas (1995) and. Rosenthal (1995) to explore for potential moderators regandiess of the results of tests of homogeneity. Skew (688; SE = 277) and, unosis (484; SE = 548) statistics were well within acceptable limits, Therefore, parametric statistics were used in many of the comparisons reported below. ‘Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant differ: fences between concurrent and longitudinal studies. There were also no significant differences among the dissemination mediaATTACHMENT AND PEER RELATIONS 1 (Goural, thesis, convention paper, book chapter). The descriptive statistics appear in Table Moderators of the Association Between Child-Mother Attachment and Children’s Peer Relations (Close friendship. Table 2 summarizes the data from the orig- inal studies of close friendships. The diversity of friendship mes- sures used precluded meaningful quantitative comparison of the implications ofthese features for ES. To test our hypothesis that, the ESs pertaining to friendship would be higher than the ESs for ‘other types of peer relationships, we matched each of these studies fn friendship with a randomly selected study conducted with unfamiliar peers, as described above, ESs pertaining to friendship, (n= 10, M = 24, SD = 14) were significantly higher than those ‘of the comparison group (n = 10, M = 14, SD = .11), FU 18) = 4.33, p <.05, Assessment of atachment, ESs were nt significantly different when Strange Situation and Q-sort findings were compared. Nor were findings significantly diferent when the analysis was ex- tended to compare dichotomously scored and continvous variables, (see Table 3), “Assessment of peer relations, We borrowed the dimensional structure of the Revised Class Play method (Masten, Morison, & Pellegrini, 1985) to distinguish among three types of peer-related behavior: aggression, withdrawal, and sociabilityMeadership, We added a fourth dimension, sociometric choice, which measures the extent {0 which peers accept a child as a porential companion, Mean ESs for these dimensions, and the different sources of information about them, are listed in Table 4, ANOVA revealed that the difference in ESs among the dimensions of peer relations was significant: FG, 94) = 351, p <_.05, Post hoc Tukey's, honestly significant difference (HSD) tests indicated thatthe ESs for sociahlity/teadership were higher (p< .05) than the ESs for the other dimensions, ‘ANOVA also revealed a significant difference among the sourees of information, FG, 94) = 9.22, p < 01. Post hoe Tukey tests indicated thatthe ESs for maternal ratings of children’s peer relations were significantly (p< 05) higher than the ESs forall the other sources, which did not differ from each other. Child gender. Separate data for boys and girls were available for only 14 studies and are sumamarized in Table 5. The difference ‘between the ESs for boys and girls was not significant, Table 1 Average Eifect Size (r) by Source of Study Source Mw k ‘so Studies featuring concurent measurement of atachmeat ‘and social competence Journal article 223 n a7 These ‘93, 7 134 Chapter 210 2 038 (Convention paper 167 3 165 Stade featuring measurement of socal competence at fllow-up Joumalaricte ais n 12 Thesis il 2 156 Chapter 03 4 108 Age at assessment, The correlation (n = 63) between the average age of participants at the time of the fist atachment ‘measure in cach study and the overall ES was .23 (p <5). The correlation between attachment security and the average age of Prtcipants atthe time ofthe lst peer-elations measure was also, significant, 163) = 22, p <.05, Confirmation of our hypothesis thatthe ESs would be signfi- cantly larger for panicipants in middle childhood or adolescence than for younger children was complicated by the fact that a a 126 Age Gn years) at tine of Social competence measurement sors iss et) 05 as a2 442 6 2. ° 0 20 297 9 12 isk status No known isk 16 as ast Low SES 2m. 8 101 Atti for disorder 234 5 16894 SCHNEIDER, ATKINSON, AND TARDIE attachment measures used in studies of peer relations do not, in fac, reflect those attachment processes that are most relevant to the study of peer relationships It should also be mentioned, with respect to the possible con straining influeace of attachment measurement, that carly aac ‘ment measures may be unstable. Belsky, Campbell, Cohn, and ‘Moore (1996), for example, found no reliable stability in Strange Situation classifieations among three samples of infants assessed twice within 6 oF 7 months. Similarly, Goldberg, Washington, et ‘a's (1999) prediction of attachment security from 1 to 4 years did not exceed chance (based on the Strange Situation and a preschool separation procedure, respectively). Ina qualitative review, ‘Thompson (1998) pointed out that the stability of attachment security depends on numerous contextual factors (as yet insfli- ciently explored) such as family SES, changing life circumstances, (eg. mothers’ retum to work, nonmateral care), and maternal personality variables of particular relevance here. Instability of tachment, whether explained by known environmental change of merely attdbutable co measurement error, may attenuate the link bberween attachment and other social relations, especially in lon- sitodinal studies. Similarly, issues with respect to the assessment of peer relations say also altenuate the association between attachment and other relationships: Some peer-relations measures may assess aspects of ‘eer relationships that are more strongly'assoziated” with attach- ‘meot than are other aspects. Our inclusion criteria excluded what may be the least valid source of information’ on children's peer relations atleast in terms of convergent vilidty shir self-reports (Bierman & Welsh, 1997). Nevertheless this exclusion downplays the child's own perspective, which some regatd-as dstinet from that of external sources but not necessaily naceutate (eg, Hymel ‘& Franke, 1985), The decision to elimitate these self-tepor stud ies reflected a desire to base our infeteaces on the best data, [Nevertheless it may be of heuristic value to consider those studies briefly because they complement the database of this meta analysis with a large number of adolescent studies, Although we did not calevlate mete-analytic statistics forthe iscarded studies, ‘our impression is that the ESs probably vary as iach as those of the studies that qualified for inclusion andimay’not be excessively inflated by shared method variance. Soin ofthe samples did yield significant correlations between self-reports of péer relations and self-reports of attachment to parents (Kébak 4 Sceery, 1988 Soble, 1987), However, Lapsiey, Rice; and FitzGetald (1990) did not find a significant association between jpareit-adolescent at tachment and social adjustment inthe frst year of college, Rice, (Cunningham and Young (1997) found tht attachment to fathers, ‘was associated with social competence abcolege but that atach ‘ment to mothers was not, Schneider and Younger (1996) found that self-reported attachment to both fathers and mothers was inconsistently cortelated with self-report and pareat-report mei sures of peer relations in high school Similar mixed results characterize the relatively few studies conducted in which self-reports were used with children rather than adolescents. For example, Toth and Cicchetti (1996), working, With child vieims of abuse by parents, found that self-reports of relatedness with parents correlated with self-perceptions of social competence. However, in fllowing into elementary school a sam= ple of children who had participated in intensive observational research duting preschool, Howes, Hamilton, and Philipsen (1998) found that early attachment bonds with teachers corelated with children’s perceptions of the quality oftheir friendships but that ‘earlier mother-child attachment was unrelated, “Many researchers chose peer and teacher reports, which are valid measures of peer relations but perhaps not optimal for the purpose of assessing the implications of early child-parent attach ‘ment bonds. Peer and teacher reports on children's peer relations do provide information that i useful, for example, in identifying children who are rejected by their peers or who are aggressive and disruptive in their classrooms. However, both peer and teacher repors are subject to positive and negative halo effects, which right lead 10 the designation as socially competent of children ‘who are physically attractive, proficient at sports, excellent at academies, and compliant with school routines. There is litte reason to believe that the more distal predictors of peer acceptance ‘or teacher rated socisl competence are linked closely to child~ parent attachment, ChildParent Attachment as a Predictor of Children’s Friendship We predicted a stronger ES for friendship suidies because the ‘bonds of family life ae more similar tothe trust and intimacy of close friendships than tothe social skills involved in negotiating peer relations with other classmates and acquaintances. This, proved to be the case (rs = .24-and .14 for studies of friendship and of relations with nontiends, respectively), confirming the conclusions of an earlier qualitative review (Belsky & Cassidy, 1995), Therefore, we posit that the subset of friendship studies ‘provides the best estimate available ofthe ES between atachment and peer relations, although we acknowledge that there are few such studies inthe literature (n= 10), Hence, the 24 ES must be interpreted wit caution pending further research. I should also be noted thatthe comprehensive measurement of friendship that has been advocated recently (e., Furman, 1996) is rarely evident in the 10-study data sot, Most of the many facets of friendship are absent from the original data (see Table 2). Friendships ae almost always measured ata single time point, often from the perspective of only one of the two friends. Information about the attachment stanus of both friends was gathered in only four studies (Kerns, 1994; Kems & Grays, 1995; Kems, Klepac, & Cole, 1996; Park & Waters, 1989). No investigator assessed the prosociality of the fiend, although an antisocial friend can do more harm than good toa child's overall social competence, These issues both limit the generalizability of extant studies and suggest a direction for furore ‘work. Two other findings are consistent with the finding that atach- ment is more strongly related to friendship than to relations with peers who are not close ftiends. The first involves the fact thatthe link between attachment and peer relations sizengthens with the age at which peer relations are measured. This may account for the higher ESs for samples older dhan 8 years, because the: processes inherent in forming nd maintaining fiendships—such as inti- macy, conflict resolution, and reliable alliance—are related more closely to the overall social competence of children from the ‘middle elementary-school years onward (Aboud & Mendelson, 1996; Berndt eta, 1986). Iti important to note thatthe critical studies in which follow-up edntinued into the early adolescent ‘years, when close friendships erystallize and affect overall psy=ATTACHMENT AND PEER RELATIONS 95 hosocial adjustment (cg. Sullivan, 1983), are act numerous, The promise ofthis direction is indicated by te relatively large ESs in the studies conducted on friendship with children in preadoles- cence and adolescence (see Table 2: Freitg et al, 1996, ES = 43; ems et al, 1996, ES. and Piertebumbert, Iannott, & ‘Commings, 1985, ES = .18), Furthermore the effects of attach- ment for adolescents may have been underrepresented in the present calculations because we consolidated the multiple aticles from Alan Sroufe's laboratory to avoid assigning weight to mul- tiple studies from the same laboratory. Nevertheless, those articles, describe the data that are probably the most compzchensive, the longest, and the most relevant to the purposes of the present review. Thus, despite many drawbacks, thee are some pate in the present findings that are perfectly consistent with atachment theory ‘Consistent with the comparatively large ES linking attachment and fiiendship is the significant difference between ESs based on pparent-rated Social interaction and those hased on information ‘obiained from peers or teachers or by direct observation. One explanation for this finding is that mothers have a more extensive and relevant perspective on their children's social interaction: They see their children with friends during more informal inter- actions that portray the childen’s relationship styles, However, it is also possible that the mothers” own attachment representations ‘and their own relationships with their children may color theit perception of their children’s peer relationships. This issue exem- plifies the need for multiple assessment approaches within any siven study of peer relationships. ‘Age and Cultural Differences Another finding of interest in the prevent meta-analysis was the significant correlation (r = .23) showing that the older the sample js when assessed for attachment security, the stronger the BS linking attachment and peer relations. Bowlby (1969) argued that ‘intemal working models become more stable with age. The broad range of ages incorporated here may render this meta-analysis particularly sensitive to the development of stable working models through infancy, childhood, and adolescence. The increasing sta- bility of these models may account for the increasing power of prediction. The upper Fit of validity is constrained by reliability; hence, a more stable predictor potentially has ereater power than & less stable predictor. Another possibility is that as children age, hild-parent and peer-peer relations become more similar. However, we cannot rule out the possibility thatthe ES discrep- ancy between older and younger participants is auributable to methodological differences. Unfortunately, our ability to detect, such anifact i limited by the small number of studies conducted with children older than 8 years. We did find a significant (p< .05) cultural difference: More studies in the older block were conducted outside of North America (42% vs. 129) Several other differences between the suidies conducted with older and younger children were marginal (.10 > p > .05): More studies in the older block involved children at risk (25% vs. 10%); in studies featuring follow-up components, the interval was longer (M = 5.0 years [SD = 45] vs. 29 years [SD = 1.9)), FUL, 33) = 3.56, p ~ .068. Hoviever, these differences (i. culture, risk status, and follow-up interval) were not significant predictors of FS in the fll dataset, Furthermore, there were no significant differences inthe propor tions of studies featuring followup, the use of Strange Situation or Q-sort methods as the original measuze of attachment, ot the relative frequency of direct observations and peer, parent, and teacher reports 10 assess peer relations. It is uue that Q-sort ‘measures tend to be used with older participants (M = 48 months, ‘compared with 17 months forthe Strange Situation in the curent sample). This fact may account for some of the age differences Decause, as reported above, the ESs for Q-sort findings were somewhat higher than those for Stange Situation findings, al though the difference was not significant, However, many of the highest ESs were in follow-up studies by Sroufe and his col- leagues, in which early adolescents were followed for many years after the initial atachment measurement, which was based on the ‘Strange Situation technique. Furthermore, although BSs for tadies tusing Q-sort methods were somewhat larger than those for studies using the Strange Siwation, the diference was not significant. Hopefully, the reasons for the correlations between age and ES will become clearer as more studies are conducted with older children and adolescents. With respect to cross-cultural issues, the mumber of studies ‘conducted outside of North America is limited, but within-culture ‘aration in ESs appears as prea as cross-cultural variation. These ata provide no reason to doubt the cross-cultural repicsbility of the hypothesis that attachment i inked to peer relations. However, many of the studies were conducted in societcs similar to the United States in terms of the major dimensions of cultural varia. tion: The United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the turban Jewish population in Tsrac! are al clasified as relatively individualistic within the spectrum of societies (Hofstede, 1984). "The mostly colletivistc societies of Latin America and Africa are not represented at all in the literature. Comparisons between ‘Northern and Southern Europe could also be revealing because of the greater orientation toward extended family in the Mediterra- rnean European counties (Georgas et al, 1997). Thus. although there is evidence for the applicability of attachment theory across cultures its pertinence t9 much of the world’s population bas yet to be explored. Examination of the individual studies provides clues as to why the ESs within cultures vary as widely as Ss across cultures. In ‘Europe, the most probable explanation for the ES in the Suess et al (1992) study, which is much higher than the ESs in the other ‘two German studies, is that Suess et al. measured the friendships, of early adolescents, whereas the other studies focused onthe less ‘intimate retations of younger children. The tree studies conducted in Bast Asia do represent collectvistic counties in which the extended family assumes a predominant role in children’s upbring- ing. One of these, however, was conducted in Ching after the {implementation of the one-chilé policy. Is ES, higher than those of the studies from Japan and Korea, may reflect the extemal constrains on child-parent bonds that result from the one-child policy, Because only children may receive particularly high levels lof responsiveness and attention from theix parents (Wu, 1992). The fone study conducted with Kibhute children (Oppenkicim et sl, 1988) had a lower ES for child-parent attachment than the Israeli study by Granot and Mayseless (1996), which was conducted with city children. This finding miay reflect the compensatory effect of attachment to the kibbutz metapelet. Thus. although the diserepant findings among studies conducted in Burope and Asia can be96 SCHNEIDER, ATKINSON, AND TARDIF reconciled to some extent, corroboration of the utility of atch ‘ment theory in non-Western countries depends on new research. Possible Moderators Requiring Additional Investigation “There was no significant difference between groups according to risk status, and there was as much variability within low-risk and high-risk groups as there was between them. These findings ray be ausibutable tothe failure to differentiate varied forms of disturbance when studying clinical populations (e.., Wright eta, 1995) and may render it impossible to respond to Rutter’s (1995) plea for clarification of the implications of anachment theory for atypical child development. Nevertheless. there were very high ESS in the few studies conducted with atypical child samples, such fas Troy and Sroufe's (1987) study on bully victims, which ‘emerged as an outlier, as well as the Wright eta. (1995) study of ‘mixed clinical sample, which had the second highest ES in the data set (59), These high ESs may or may not be coincidental. Further research with atypical populations will determine whether sitachment bonds are particulaely crucial forthe peer relations of children experiencing psychological distress. ‘Although the diversity ofthe child-mother attachment literature lends itself to rich speculation, litle can be established about the ‘implications of child-father attachment for children's peer rela- tions. The ES is small but is similar tothe BS found in comparable data on maternal attachment and peer relations. Beyond this, we ‘can say litle, The ES is based on only five studies. Moreover, all ‘but one ofthese studies (Freitag etal, 1996) focused on children’s lasge-group interactions to the neglect of close interpersonal rela- tionships and did not distinguish between the effects of paternal attachment on the peer relations of sons and daughters. Thus, we conclude that the implications of paternal attachment for children's ‘peer relations remain largely unexplored. ‘About 25% ofthe studies in the current data pool considered other family of child variables in addition to parent-child atach- ‘ment as predictors of children’s peer relations. Unfortunately, the calculation of meta-analytic estimates of these additional consi- butions was precloded by the heterogeneity of the variables. In ‘none ofthese studies was attachment the sole significant predictor of children’s peer relations In most studies, variables other than attachment accounted for substantial addtional variance: child ‘temperament (Bates et al, 1985; Sul, 1995), child-rearing prace tices (Fagot, 1997; Youngblade & Belsky, 1992), attudes toward parenting (Adams, 1994; Kavesh, 1991), maternal depression (Re bin, Both, Zahn-Waxler, Cummings, & Wilkinson, 1991), mater- nal psychosocial adjustment (Lyons-Ruth et al., 1993), childs attachment to teachers (Howes & Wu, 1990), child's prior day care experience (Howes, 1991), and observed maternal warmth {(Christopoulou, 1988). In two studies of preschooler, Lieberman (1977) found that attachment and other variables predicted differ- cent aspects of child social competence: Attachment correlated with ‘nonverbal indicators of social competence, such as sharing, ‘whereas the childen’s previous experience with peers better pre- dicted verbat interactions. In afew eases (e.g. Silverman, 1990, on child-rearing styles and Denham, 1987, on mothers’ display of emotion) both attachment and other variables were found 10 be linked to children’s peer relations, but the analyses were not designed to compare their relative contibutions. In closing, we suggest that relatively litle willbe gained with ‘new correlational studies linking mother-child attachment with the mainstays of peer-rlations assessment (Le., observations and sociometris) during early childhood. More comprehensive studies exploring maliple dimensions of mothering and fathering as pre- dicts of children’s close imterpersonal relationships across the life span would complement the existing data meaningfully. Al- though the data presented in this article do illustrate that child parent attachment is corelated with children's peer relations, none of the studies provides a suitable rejoinder to Hinde's (1988) ‘contention that there is no evidence for the existence or causal role ‘of intemal working models. It is very conceivable that the attach ‘ment bond facilitates children’s peer relations in other ways. For ‘example, mothers of securely attached children have been found to ‘encourage reciprocity and cooperativeness in child-motherinter- sctions (see Rustell, Pei, & Mize, 1998), which may transfer co peer relations, Secure attachment may lead to positive, authorta tive child-rearing, which may account for its effects on peer relations (Goldberg, Grusec, & Jenkins, 1999), Hopefully, the next ‘generation of research on child-parent attachment and children's peer relations will improve more substantially on the hypothesis {hat “all good things go together” (Youngblade & Belsky, 1992). References References marked with an asterisk inca studies included in the swetaenayas ‘Aboud, F. B. & Mendelson, M. J. (1996). Determinants of fiendship selection and quality: Developmental perspectives. In W. M. Bukowski, |A.F, Newcomb, & W. W. Harup (Eas), The company they hep: Friendship childhood and adolescence (pp. 87-136), New York CCambrisge University Press ‘Adams, B.L. (1998). An investigation of the interrelationships among security of attachment, parenting atules, and the development of Competence. Unpubiabed doctoral disertation, Vigiia Consortium for Professional Psychology, Vitgnia Beach, VA. ‘Adamson, 1. (1990, The relationship Berween anachment and socal ‘competence in per relations in eary childhood. Unpublished doctoral ‘Gsseration, Boston University, School of Edveton ‘Ainsworth M.D. S., Blea, M.C., Waters, & Wall S. (1978). Paterns of enachment: A psychological study ofthe strange situation. Hillsdale, 1 Exbaum. Aigsworth, M.D. 8. Wiig, B. A (1968) Atachment and exploratory ‘behavior of cne-yeaolds i svange situation. In B. M. Foss (Fé), Determinants of nfm behavior IV (pp 1h1=136) Landon: Meten ‘alle, J.P. Moore, C., Kuperine, G. & Bel, K. (1998). Atachment ‘and adolescent soca fnctioning. Child Development, 68, 1405-1419. Asher, 8.R, & Coe, JD. (1990), Per reection in childhood. New York ‘Cambridge Unversity Pres Asher, S. R. Parker, 1G, & Walker, D. L. (1996), Disinguishing frcndship fom acceptance: Implications for intervention and assess- ment. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F Newcomb, dW. W, Hartup Eds), The company they hep: Friendship childhood and adolescence (Pp. 56-408) New York: Cambridge University Press. ‘Atkinson, Nceols, G.A., Paglia, A. Coofbear, Parker, K: C. Hi Poalon,L, Ger 8. & Sitareneos, G. 2000). A meta-analysis of ime eween msleral seaiivity and attachment assessments: Implications for internal working models in ifaneyoddlerhood. Journal of Socal ‘and Personal Relationships, 17, 791-810. Bates, J.E, Maslin, C_A., & Frankl, K. A. (1985) Atachiment inseco- ity, child-mother ieteaction, and temperament as predicts of ‘behavior problem ratings sage tee years In. Bretheton &E. WatersATTACHMENT AND PEER RELATIONS 7 (Eis), Monographs of the Socier for Research x Child Develop ment, 30, 167-193, Belsky, J. (1996). Parca, infant, and socil-ontextual antecedents of Tatherson atachmentsecunty. Developmental Psychology, 32, 905— 913, Belsky!1, Campbell. B., Cohn. J... Moore, G (1996) Instability of ‘lan porenstacinent security. Developmental Psychology. 32, 921~ 924, Belsky, J, & Cassidy, J (1995), Attachment theory and evidence. In M. Ruter & D. Hay (Eds), Development through life (pp. 373-402) ‘London: Blackwell Belsky, 1, Rosenberger, K, & Cmic, K. (1995). Matemal personality. ‘manial quality. socal support and infant temperament: Ther signifi ‘ance for infa-mother attachment in human families. In C. R. Pryce, RD. Marin, &D. Skuse (Eds), Motherhood in human and nonhuman primates (Sr Schulz-Bieger Symposium, Kartanse Ingen, 1994; pp. 115-120), Base, Switvedand: Karger Bernd, T. J (1996) Exploving the effects of rendship quality on sci ‘evelopment In W. M. Bukowski, AF. Newcomb, & W. W. Harp (Eas), The company they keep: Friendship in childhood and adotes- ‘cence (pp. 346-365). New York: Cambridge Unversity Pes Berndt, TJ, Hawkins, JA. & Hoyle, S.G. (1986). Changes in iendship “during a school year: Effects on chlren's and adolescents’ impressions ‘of friendship and sharing with frends, Child Development, 57, 1284 297 ‘Bieonan,K-L., & Welsh, J. . (1997), Social eluionship dec. tn E.1 Mash & LG. Terdal (Eds), Assessment of childhood disorders (pp. 328-368), New York: Guilford Press. Booth, CL, Rose-Krasnor, L, MeKinnoa, J, & Rubin, KH. (1994) Predicting social adjustment in mide childhood: The role of preschool tachment security and matemal se. Social Development, 3 189- 206 "Booth, C.L., Rose-Krasnor, L., & Rubia, KH. (1991). Relating pe Scholes’ social competence and ther mothers parenting behaviors to cay attachment security and hihsrisk stats, Juma! of Social and Personal Relationship, 8, 36-382. "Booth, C.L, Rubia, K.H., & Rose-Krasoo,L. (1998) Perceptions of ‘emotional support from mother and rend in mide childhood: Links| With socishemotionsl adgpaion abd peeschoolatlachment secu (Child Developmen, 68, 427-482 ‘Bost, KK, Vaughn, B. E., Washington, W. N..Cielinski, Ko La & Bradbard, M. R (1998). Socal competence social support, and atc ment? Demareation of construct domains, measurement, and paths of| influence for preschool children atending Head Stat. Child Devlop- ment, 69, 192-218, Bowlby, J. (1969). Auachment and loss: Vol. 1: Anachment. Harmons ‘wont, Midlesex, England: Penguin Bowlby. J. (1978). tachment and loss: Vo. 2: Separation. New York ‘Basie Books. Betheron, L, Ridgeway, D, & Cassidy, J. (1950), Assessing intemal ‘working models of the stachment relationship, In M. T- Greenberg, D, (Cichat, & M. Cummings (Eas), Attachment inthe preschool years: Theory, research and intervention (pp. 273-308). Chicago: University of Chicago Press Bukowski, W. M, Pizamigho, M. R,, Newcomb, A. F, & Hous B (1956). Popularity as an affordance for fendship: The link berween _roup and dyadic experience Social Development 5, 189-202, Ccasidy, 1, & Mavi, R. (1992). Aachen! organization in preschoot ‘hidren: Procedures and coding manual, Unpublished manssript, Peansytvania State University and University of Virginia. Christopoulos, C. (1988). Familial antecedents of per socal competence in second graders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia Clark, M.S, Mills, J. Ry & Corcoran, D. M. (1989). Keeping tack of reeds and inputs of fiends and strangers. Personality and Socal Psy chology Bulletin 15, 33-52, (Clarke Stewart, K (1989) Infant day cae: Maigned or malignant? Amer: lean Psychologist, 4, 266-273 ‘Cobb, C. LH. 1996). Adolescent parent tachment and fail problem solving sys, Family Process, 5, 57-82. Cohen, J (1988). Stasea! power analysis forthe behavioral selencer (Qad ed). Hillsdale, NJ: Esau, ‘Cohn, D. A, (1950) Child-motberatachment of sx-yer-olis and sci, competence at school. Child Development, 6, 152-162. ‘Cooper, H. M. (1984). The imegratve research even: A sola selence approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Cooper, He Ms & Hedges, L. V. (1994). The handbook of research “thesis, New York: Rusel Sage Foundation Copeland Mitchell, J, Denham, S.A, & DeMolder, E. K.(1997), Q-sort ‘sessment of ehld-teacher aachment elatonships and socal compe: tence inthe preschool. Early Education and Development, 8, 27-36. Citenden, P.M, (1988). Relationships at risk In J. Belsky & T. Nezwor- ski (EAS), Clinical implications of attachment theory (pp. 136-178), Hillsdale, NJ: Extbaum Daniels-Beimes, T. (1989). Measuring peer sts in boys and gis: A proem of apples and oranges. In B. H. Schelde G. Ati, J. Nadel & RP. Weisberg (4s), Sacal competence in developmental perspec: tive (9p. 107120). Dordecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer ‘Denham, S.A. (1987, August), Child competence and maternal emotion sociaiaron correlates of tachment Q-Sort variables. Poster presented 2 the 95th Annual Convention ofthe American PaycholopicalAsioe- ation, New York, NY. De Wolf, M.S. € yan Uzendoom, M. H. (1997). Sentivty and atach- tment: A-meti-analysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment Child Development 65, 371-591, Dishin, T. 1, Andrews, D.W.,& Crosby, L. (195). Amseca boys and their fiends in erly adolescence: Relationship characteristics, quality. ‘nd interactional process Child Development, 68, 39-181 Elite, J, Englund, M. & Sroufe, L.A (1992). Predicting poe com- tence and eer reltionshipe in childhood fom early child-pareat relationships. In R. D. Parke & G. W. Lad (Bds.), Famiy-peervela- fonships: Models of tnkage (gp. 77-106) Hillsdale, NI: Exum, "Ere, T. (1995), Predicting preschools’ social coping fom ery atach- meat history. In S. Shulman (Ed), Close relationships and sociemo- tional development: Human development (pp. 1-34). Norwood, NJ Ablex ‘Erickson, M. F., Sroue, L.A. & Egeland. B. (1985). The relationship tween quality of atachment an behavior problems in preschool in 2 higherisk sample. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 501-2, Serial No. 209) ‘Fagot, B. I. (1997). Attachment, parenting, and peer interactions of toddler chilren, Developmental Psychology, 33, 489-499, "Fagot B. I & Kavanagh, K. (1990), The prediction of atisocil behavior from avoidant atachment clasfcaon. Child Development, 6, 8A 873 ‘Fagot, B. 1, & Pears, K.C. (1996). Changes in atachment daring the third Year. Consequences and predictions. Development and Psychopath 28y, 8, 325-344 Fox, N-A. (1995). Of the way we were: Adult memes abou tachment experiences and their ole in determining infan-paret relationships: A commentary on van Uzendoor. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 404-810. “Freitag, MK, Belsky, , Grossmann, K, Grossmann, KE, & Scheurer Englisch, H. (1996). Continuity in ehild-parentrelaonships fom in- fancy to middle childhood and reitions with fendship competence Child Development, 67, 1837-1454, Frodi, A. (1983). Atuchient behavior and sociability with strangers ia premature and full tem infants, fant Merial Meath Journal, 14-22. Furman, W. (1996), The measurement of friendship pereptions: Coneep-98 SCHNEIDER, ATKINSON, AND TARDIF ‘ual and methodologic issues. In W. M. Bukowski, AF, Newcomb, & 1. W. Hortup Eas). The company they keep: Friendship in childhood dnd adolescence (pp. 41-65). New York: Cambidge University Press. *Galluza, D.C, Matheson, C.C., Moore, JA, & Howes, C. (1990) Social orientation to adits and peer i infant cul eae. InN, Fox & GG. Fein (Ets), Infant day care: The curent debate (Vol. 4, pp. 183~ 192), Norwood, NI Ablex. Georg, J, Chistakopoutou, S., PooringaY. H., Angleter, A, God- ‘wit, R, & Charlambous,N, (1997) The relationship of family bonds to family sieve and fonction across eutues. Journal of Cross: Caltural Psychology, 28, 303-320 George, C. Kaplan, NA Main, M. (1996). Adult AnachmentInerview (Grd). Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Berkeley, Deparment of Payehoogy. Goidberg, §, Grusee, J. E & Jenkins, 1. M, (1999), Contidece tn protection: Arguments fora narow defision of aaachment Juma of Family Pychology, 13, 45-883 Goldberg, S. Washington, 1, Mybsl, N. Janus, M, Simmons, R. 2, ‘MacLusky, I, & Fowler, RS. (1995) Subility and change in attach tment from Infancy to preschool, Manascrptsubenited for publication, ‘Gran, D., & Maysles, O. (1996, July). The relation beeen atack- ‘ment pateras and adaptive functioning in the school environment ‘amongst children in middle chidood. Pape presete atte meeting of the Intemational Society for the Study of Bebaviorl Development, Quebec City, Quebes. Canada Greenberg, M.T.,DeKiyen, M., Spelt, M.L., & Endrign, M. C1997) "The role of attachment processes in extermlizing psychopathology in young chidren nL. Atkinson & K. Zacher (Eds), Adachment and psychopathology (pp. 196-222). New York: Guilford Press Grusec, br & Lytton, H. (1988). Socal development. New York: Springes- Verlag ‘Helston, L, A (1994). The relationship Berween preschoolers’ anach- ‘ment, social competence and parenting stress in two tpexof cid are Grrangements Unpobinbed master’s thesis, Concordia Univesity, ‘Montes, Quebec, Cana. Hinde, R.A. (1979). Towards understanding relavionships. London: Ac ‘deme Pres. Hinde, R.A. (1988). Contnutes and discontinuities: Concepual issues ‘and methodological considerations. In M. Rute (Ed), Studies of pay- ‘hosoclal isk: The power of lngiadial data (pp. 95-122). Carbide, England: Cambridge University ress. Hodgens, J.B, & McCoy, J. F. (1989). Distinctions among rejected ‘children onthe bass of peer nominated aggression, Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 18, 121-128. Holstee, G. (1984, Hofede's culture dimensions: An independent val ‘ation sing Rokesch's Value Survey. Journal of Crass-Culral Py chology, 15, 417-433, Hollingshead, A. B., & Redich, F.C. (1958). Social class and mental “ines, New York: Wiley “Howes, C, 1991). A comparison of preschool behaviors with peers when children envll in chik-care at infants or older cilen. Joumal of Reproductive and Infant Pechology. 9. 105-118. Howes, C. (1996) The eariestfendships. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. ‘Newcomb, de W. W. Harp (Eds), The company they hep: Friendship fn childhood and adolescence (pp. 66-86), New York: Cambridge University Pres. Howes, C, Hamilton, C. E, & Philips, L. C. (1998). Stability and continuity of bildcarepver and chld-poer elaionships. Child Devel opment 69, 418-126, “Howes, C- Matheson, C.C., & Hamton, C.F. (1994), Matera, caches, ‘nd child care history corelates of ehldren's relationships with peers, Child Development 5, 264-273, “Howes, C, Rodaing,C., Galluzzo, D.C, & Myers, L (1990). Atachment nd ld cae: Relationships with mother and caregiver. InN. Fox & G. Fein (Eds), Infant daycare: The curren debate (pp. 169-181). Nor ‘wood, NI Abies. Howes, C, & Wa, F (1990). Peer ineractions and fendshps in an ‘ethically diverse school seting. Child Development, 61, 537-541 Hymel, S, & Franke, S. (I98S). Children's peer relations: Astesing ‘self-perception. In B.H, Schade K.H, Rubin, & JE. Ledingham (GAs), Children’s per relavons: Istwer in asesoment and intervention (pp. 75-92), New York: Springer-Verlag. ‘tacobeon, 5. L, Taner, R.L, Wille, D-E, & Aytch, D. M. (1986). Infant-other attachment and early peer relations: The assessment of behavior in an iaterative contest In E. C. Mueller & C. R. Cooper (Eis), Process and outcome peer relationships (pp 1-18). Oran, FL: Academic Pres. ‘acobson, JL, & Wille, . B, (1986), The jnfuence of atachment ‘ate on developmental changes in pee interaction fom he toddler to the presshoo! period. Child Developmen, 57, 338-347 Johnson, B, T, Mullen, B, & Salas, E. (1995). Comparison of thee met-aalyticapprosches. Journal of Aplied Psychology, 80, 94-106. Kagan 5.1995). On atachmeat. Harvard Review of Peychiatry, 3. 104— 108. ‘Kavesh, LB. (1991, Antecedents of peer competence in childhood Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tliaios at Chicago. ‘Kms, KA. (1984) A longitudinal examination of inks between child mother tachment and childrea'sFienships in easly childhood. In . Shulman (EA), Clare relationships and socioemotional development: Huan development (Vol. 7, pp. 379-381). Norwood, NI: Abies. ‘Kems, KA. & Ban, J. M. (1995). Atachment and pla: Convergence across components of child-parent relationships and their relation to oer competence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 243-260. "Kerns, KA, & Grays, A. (1998, Api. Child-motheranechment and “endship formation in preschoolers Pper presented athe meting of the Society for Reteach in Child Developrent,Indansplis, IN. ‘Kems, K. A. Klepac, L., & Cole, A. (1996). Peer elaonships and ‘preadlescen’ perceptions of security inthe child-mother relationship, Developmental Psychology, $2, 487-46. *Kiein, RP, & Durfee, J. T. (1979), Prediction of preschool social ‘behavior from social-emotional development atone yest. Child Psych airy and Hienan Development, 8, 145-131, ‘Kobak, RR, & Seoery, A. (1988), Atachmeat in lte adolescence: ‘Working models, affect regulation, and representations of self and others. Child Development, $8, 138-146. Kupersmid, J, & Paterion, C.J (1991). Chikood peer rejection, a ession, withdrawal, and peresived competence as predictors of sel reported behavior problems in adolescence, Joural of Abnormal Child Pryohology, 19, 427-449. “LaFreniere, P. Jy & Sroute LA (198), Profiles of peer competence in the preschool: nerrelations benveen measures, influence of social ccol- 043, and relation oatachient history. Developmental Psychology, 2, 56-69. Lamb, M. B., Hwang. G. P, Fri, A. & rod, M (1982), Sear of he other and fater-infatatachnet and its elation vo sociability with strangers in tadional and nor-tadidonal Swedish families. Ifant Behavior and Development, 5, 355-267. Lamb, M, E., & Nash, A. (1989, Infant-motherstachment, sociability, ‘and peer competence. In T. J, Berndt & O. W. Ladd (Eds), Peer relationships in child development (gp. 219-246). New York: Wile. Lapaley, D.K, Rice, KG, & FisOerald, D. P. (1990). Adolescent, identity, and adjustment to college: Implications for the ‘continuity of adaptation hypothesis. Journal of Counseling and Devel opment, 68, 61-565 Lepper. M. R., Henderong, J, & Cingrs, I (1999), Understanding the fect of extrinsic rewards on intisic mativation—Uses and abuses ofATTACHMENT AND PEER RELATIONS 99 meta-analysis; Comment on Deci, Koester, and Ryan. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 669-676. Lewis, M,& Feng, C. (1989). Infant, mother and mother-infnt nts ‘ction behavior and subsequent atachment Child Development, 60, 1-837 *Lichermao, AF (1977) Preschoolers competence with a peer: Relations with attachment and peer experience. Child Development, 48, 1277- 17, "Lyons Ruth, K, Alper, L,& Repacholi,B. (1993). Disorganized fant ‘stachmentclasifiation and maternal psychosocial problems as predic- tors of hostileaggressive behavior inthe preschool classoom. Child Development, 64, 2-58. Main, M. Kaplan, N, & Cassidy, J. (1985), Securit in infancy, chilbod, td adsthood: A move tthe level of presentation. Monographs ofthe Society for Reseach in Chill Development, 501-2 Serial No. 28). Main, M, & Weston, D. (1981. The quality of toddler’ relationship to ‘mothe and futher: Relste to conflict behavior and teases to establish new relationships. Child Development, 52, 923-940. “Malatest-Mags, C, Leak, 8, Tesman, J, Shepard, B., Culver, C, & ‘Smaps, B. (1994) Profles of emotional development: Individual ferences infil and vol expression of emotion during the second and third years fife. Imerational Journal ef Behavioral Development 17, 29-260 ‘Marcus, RF, & Mine, J (1990). Validity of a eid interview measure fof attchient a8 used in child easody evaluations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70, 1083-1084 Masten AS. Morison, P, & Pellegrin, A. (1985) A revised clas play metho of poer assessment. Developmental Psychology. 20, 523-833. Moore, C. W. (1997). Models of autacment reatonships with parents, ‘nd sesual behavior in ais adolescent. Unpublished doctoral di femation, University of Vrgnia, Department of Psychology. ‘Moss, Paco... Gosselin, C, Rousseau, D., & Sc-Laureat, D. (1996) ‘Atachment and teachersepored bebwvier problems during the pe ‘school and eal sol age peviod. Development and Prychopathology, 5, 511-825, ‘Nakano, S. Uni, H, & Miyake, K. (1984-1988), Indivialitferences ‘in responses to unfamiliar objects at cwenty-three months of age. Re search and Clinical Center for Child Development. S(AnoualRepor), 45-55, *Oppentei, D., Lamb, ME. & Sagi A. (1988. Infant-adlt attach ‘ments onthe kibbutz nd thei relation o socioemotional development 4 years Iter. Developmental Prychology, 24, 427-433, ‘Park, K. A. (1992) Preschoolers’ reacons to loss of a best fiend Developmental wends and indvidoal differences. Child Sndy Journal 22, 233-282 “Park, K. A, de Waters, . (1989) Security of attachment and preschool friendships, Child Development, 60, 1076-1081 ‘Pasir, D.L. (1981). The quality of mother-infant attachment and its relationship to toddlers" inital sociability with peers. Developmental Psychology 17, 326-335, ‘Pierehumbet, Blot, RJ, & Cummings, EM. (1985). Mother ‘infant anachment, development of social competencies and beefs of selt-esponsibiliy. Archiver de Prychologl, $3, 365-374, ‘Piemebumbert B. lannot, RJ. Cummings, . M, & Zahn Watler, C. (0986), Atachment matemel et dependance. Quelgue apport de la aychologie experimental Maternal atachment and dependency: Some onbutons of experimental psychology]. Newopsychianie. de PEnjance, 3, 809-420 ‘Pierehumbert B. annot, RJ, Cummings, E. M, & Zahn-Water, C. (1989). Social funetoning with mother and peers a2 and 5 years: The infuence of axachment. International Journal of Behavioral Develop ment, 12, 85-10. Plonket, J. W.. Klein, , & Meisels, S.J. (1988). The relationship of term infant-mser to strange sociability at 3 year. nf Behavior ‘nd Development, I, 83-96. Rice, K.G., Cunningham. T. 1, & Young, M. 8. (1997) Atachment to pltets, soil competence, and emotional well-being: A comparison of| Black and White lite adolescents. Journal of Counseling, Psyc ony, 44, 89-101 ‘Rose Krsnor, 1, Rabin, K. H., Booth C1, & Copan, R. (1996), The ‘elton of maternal dretveness and child anachment security 1 socal ‘competence in preschoolers. Interaional Journal of Behavioral Devel opment 19, 38-325 Rosethal, R, (198), Interpersonal expectancy fects and psi: Some ‘commonalies and differences. New Ideas in Peychology 2 47-50 Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytie procedures for social research. Lon- don: Sage Rosenthal, R. (1995). Waiting mets analyte eviews. Paychologicl Bul {etn 118, 183-192 Rosenthal, R.,& Rubin, DB. (1982). A simple general-purpose display of, ragnitide of experimental effect. Journal of Educational Paychot gy, 74, 165-168 Rubin, K.H, Both, L., Zabn-Wanler,C., Cummings, EM & Wilkinson, M, (991). Dyaie play behaviors of children of well and depressed mothers. Development and Peychopahology, 3, 283-251 Rubi, KH, Bukowski, W.,& Parker, J. E. (1998), Peer interactions, relatonships, and groups. In W. Damon (Series Ed) & R.N. Eisenberg (Wol. Ea), Handbook of child development: Vol. 3. Social emotional, ‘and personality development (Se, pp 619-700). New York: Wiley Robin, K. Hl, LeMare L, & Lolli, §. (1990). Social withdrawal in hildhood. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds), Peer rejection in ‘childhood (pp. 217-249). New York: Cambridge University Press. Russell, A, Petit, GS, & Mize, J. (1998). Horizontal qualities in arent-child relationships: Parallels with and posible consequences or children's per reaioaship. Developmental Review, 18, 313-382 Rutter, M1998) Clinial implications of tachment conceps: Retrospect ‘nd prospect. Journal of Child Psychology and Peyhiary and Aled Disciplines 16. 549-571, Schoeider,B-H. (1999). A mul-method exploration ofthe friendships of, ‘chien considered socially withdrawn by their school peers Journal of Abnormal Child Paychoogy, 27, 118-123 Schoeidr,B.H., & Younger, A 1. (1996). Adolescent-parent tachment snd adolescents’ relations with their peers: A closer look. You & Society 28, 95-108, Schwarzer, R. (1988). Mec analysis programs. Behavior Research Meth cds, Insiramens & Computers, 20, 338. Selman, RL, & Schultz. H. (1990) Mating apiend in youth. Chicago Univesity of Chicago Press. ‘Shulman, S. (1995) Clase relationships and socioemotional development "Norwood, NJ: Ablex ‘Shulman, ., Blckr, J, & Stone, L.A. (1994). Stages of friendship ‘growth in preadlescence a8 related o attachment bisory. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 341-361 ‘silverman, N. (1990). Anachnen, maternal behavior and preschool competence at age three. Unpublished doctoral dissenaton, Boston Univenity. Soble, J.B. (1987. The relationship beween past and curen attachment and curent emotional functioning during late adolescence (Doctoral ‘isenation, California Schoo of Professional Psychology. Los Angeles, 1987. Dissertation Abstracts Intemational, 48, 1821-8 (Order No, DAS7I3198). ‘Sroufe, L.A. (1982). lfantcaregiveratachnent and pater of adap tation in preschool: The roo of maladaptation and competence. In M. Perimter (Ed), Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 41-81). Hila, NJ: Esibasm, Sroufe, LA. (1988). The sole of infan-eareiverstachients in deve100 ‘SCHNEIDER, ATKINSON, AND TARDIF ‘opment. In J. Belsky & L. Nezworski Eds), Clinical implications of arachment (pp. 18-38). Hillsdale, NF; Eefbaum "Sroufe, LA, Carin, E. 4 Shulman, 5. (199). Individuals in relation- ‘hips: Development from infancy through adolescence. In D.C. Funder, R.D. Parke, C. Tomlinson-Keasey, & K. Widaman (Eds), Studying lives though time: Persnality and development (pp. 315-342). Wash- ington, DC: American Prychologica Association. Swoufe, L.A. & Feeson, J. (1986). Atachment andthe constuction of relationships, In W. Harup & Z. Rubin (Eds), Relationships and de velopment (pp. 51-11). Hillsdale, NJ: Exbaum ‘Sroufe, L.A Schork, E,, Moti, B, Lawodk, N. & LaFreolere, P. (1984). The foe of affect in social competence n Tard J. Kagan, & R,Zajone (Bas), Emotion, cognition and behavior (pp. 289-319). New ‘York: Plenum Press. ‘Stanton, ME. (1995, Patterns of kinship and eesidence. In BB. Ingldshy & 8. Smits (E4s), Families multicultural perspective: Perspectives ‘on marriage and the family (pp. 91-116). New York: Gulford Pres. "Suess, G. J, Grossmann, K. E., & Sroufe, L.A, (1992). Effects of infant tachment to mether apd faer on quality of adaptation in preschool rom dyadic o individual organisation of self. ternational Journal of Behavioral Development, 15, 43-65 ‘Sul, 1 (1998). Temperament, chld-mother anachment, and pee rela- tionships in Korean preschool children. Unpublished! doctoral set tion, Temple University Sallivan, HS. (1952). The interpersonal theory of peychiary, New York ‘Noro. ‘Thompson, R.A. (1988). The effects of infant day care through the prism fof auachment theory: A eral april. Early Childhood Research Quarry 3 273-282, ‘Thompson, R. A. (1998), Early sociopersnaity development. In. W. DDamoo (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Bd), Handbook of child _pychology (Sth ed, pp. 25-108), New York: Wiley. ‘Thompson, R.A. Lamb, M.E. (1988). Infaas, mothers, fares, sn seanger. In M. Lewis (Ed), Beyond the dyad (pp. 195-222). New York: Plenum Press, ‘Tosh, 8. L, & Ciceheti, D, (1996), Paterms of relatedness, depressive ‘symptomatology, and perceived competence in malveated childen Journal of Consulting and Clinical Peychology, 64, 32-41. ‘Troy, M. & Sroufe, L.A. (1987). Victimization of pre-schoolers: Roe of auachent relationship history, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adotescen Prychitry, 26, 166-172 ‘Turner, P-1- (1991) Relations between tachment, gender, ad behavior with peers in preschool, Child Developmen, 62, 1875-48, urban, J. Caron, E, Egeland, B, & Sroute, A (1991) Paserns of ‘ndividual adaptation ares childhood, Development and Peychopathol- 247, 3, 44560. *Vandell,D. L, Owen, M., Wilson, K.., & Henderson, V.K. (1988) Social development in infant wins: Per an child-moter relationships Child Development, 9, 168-177 ‘van Hzendoor, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, MJ. (197) Inergen- atonal transmission of atachment: Stte ofthe arin peychometi, psychological and clinical research, InL Atkinson & K, Zacker (Eds), “Antachment and psychopathology (p. 138-170). New York: Gulfrd Pres. vvan Urendoorn, M. H,, Vereen, C. M. J. L., & Ridsen-Walraven, 1M. A. Gin pres). Is the Atachment Qtort a valid measure of| ‘tachment security in young children? In BE. Vaughn & B. Waters (Es), Pattern of secure base behavior: Q-sort perspectives on attach ‘ment and caregiving. Mabwab, NJ: Ecfbaum ‘Wariner, U. G., Grossmann, K., Fremmer-Bombik, (1994) Atachment pateras at age six in south Germany: Predictability from infancy and implications fr reschol behavior. Child Develop ment, 65, 1014-1027 Waters, E, & Deane, K. B, (1985), Defining and assessing inividval

You might also like

• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  From Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (5819)
• The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  

  From Everand

  The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  Brené Brown

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1092)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  From Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (845)
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• Principles: Life and Work

  

  From Everand

  Principles: Life and Work

  Ray Dalio

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (609)
• The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  Jeannette Walls

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1717)
• Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  

  From Everand

  Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  Angela Duckworth

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (590)
• Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  Jesmyn Ward

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1104)
• Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  

  From Everand

  Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  Margot Lee Shetterly

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (897)
• Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  

  From Everand

  Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  Phil Knight

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (540)
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  

  From Everand

  The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  Stephen Chbosky

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2104)
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  

  From Everand

  The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  Ben Horowitz

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (348)
• Bad Feminist: Essays

  

  From Everand

  Bad Feminist: Essays

  Roxane Gay

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1018)
• Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  

  From Everand

  Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  Ashlee Vance

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (474)
• Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  

  From Everand

  Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  Carmen Maria Machado

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (822)
• The Outsider: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Outsider: A Novel

  Stephen King

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1866)
• The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  

  From Everand

  The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  Siddhartha Mukherjee

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (271)
• The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  

  From Everand

  The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  Viet Thanh Nguyen

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (122)
• Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  Frank McCourt

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (441)
• Brooklyn: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Brooklyn: A Novel

  Colm Toibin

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (1947)
• The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  

  From Everand

  The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  Meik Wiking

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (401)
• A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  Fredrik Backman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (4770)
• The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  

  From Everand

  The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  Thomas L. Friedman

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2259)
• Steve Jobs

  

  From Everand

  Steve Jobs

  Walter Isaacson

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (808)
• The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  

  From Everand

  The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  Sarah M. Broom

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (98)
• Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  

  From Everand

  Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  Gilbert King

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (266)
• The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  Garth Stein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (4208)
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  

  From Everand

  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  Betty Smith

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1929)
• Yes Please

  

  From Everand

  Yes Please

  Amy Poehler

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1902)
• A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  

  From Everand

  A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  Dave Eggers

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (231)
• Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  

  From Everand

  Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  Doris Kearns Goodwin

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (234)
• The Woman in Cabin 10

  

  From Everand

  The Woman in Cabin 10

  Ruth Ware

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2522)
• Fear: Trump in the White House

  

  From Everand

  Fear: Trump in the White House

  Bob Woodward

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (738)
• Wolf Hall: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Wolf Hall: A Novel

  Hilary Mantel

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (3811)
• John Adams

  

  From Everand

  John Adams

  David McCullough

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2409)
• On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  

  From Everand

  On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  Naomi Klein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (74)
• The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  M.L. Stedman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (789)
• Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  Jennifer Egan

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (792)
• The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  John le Carré

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (104)
• The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  

  From Everand

  The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  George Packer

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (45)
• Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  

  From Everand

  Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  Jay Sekulow

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (137)
• Little Women

  

  From Everand

  Little Women

  Louisa May Alcott

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (104)