PARENTAL ATTACHMENT, TEACHER

ATTACHMENT, AND ATTACHMENT TO

GOD OF ADOLESCENTS WITH
BROKEN FAMILIES

PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION: A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL

2023
Volume: 14
Pages: 23-40
Document ID: 2023PEMJ1235
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8383418
Manuscript Accepted: 2023-27-9
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Parental Attachment, Teacher Attachment, and Attachment to

God of Adolescents with Broken Families
Christian Khiel P. Unto*, Patricia Anne Sotto, Laurence Arvin Quintos
Jannah Janelle Sangalang, Elvira David
For affiliations and correspondence, see the last page.
Abstract
Various researches about the attachment of adolescents with broken families contradict each other.
Despite the growing number of researches about this matter, using attachment theory to examine the
attachment level of adolescents with broken families is rarely used. To delve in deeper about the
attachment of such adolescents, a sequential mixed-method design was used for this study, to assess
and explore the parental attachment, teacher attachment and God attachment of the participants.
Using Pearson correlation, it was discovered that a significant relationship exist with the three
variables. Participants have average attachment with their parents, teachers, and God. Results from
the quantitative part of the study is explained by the variety of experiences and individual differences
of the participants. Qualitative findings imply support with the quantitative results. Using thematic
analysis, it was discovered that participants have closer relationship with their teachers than their
parents. The respondents also find more significant similarities and association between their teachers
and God, than their biological mothers and fathers. The teachers’ proximity to students may be
pointed as a reason why adolescents have more intimate relationship with their teachers. With these,
the teachers’ roles shifts from being a secondary attachment to a primary attachment.

Keywords: broken families, adolescents, parental attachment, teacher attachment, God attachment

Introduction the developmental aspects of adolescents with broken

Among all the notable impacts of parenting, the
molding of a child’s identity is, perhaps, the most
crucial to a child’s development (Vershueren,
Doumen, & Buyse, 2012). Parents set up an
environment for their children, wherein they will yield
certain characteristics of their parents. Certain
problematic behaviors might arise, such as suicidal
ideations, if the family environment is poor (Zhai et
al., 2015). As an example, parents who have religious
backgrounds and established a religious environment
in the family, could account for the spirituality and
religiosity of their children as they grow up (Limke &
Mayfield, 2011).
However, if a parent has an intensifying positive
impact on a child’s growth and holistic transformation,
it is also equally destructive once the parents
negatively affect the child’s life (Hussain & Hussain,
2015; Saikia, 2017). Individuals who suffer the most
negative consequences are adolescents with “broken
families,” a term often used for families whose
spouses have separated. The negative impacts brought
by broken families are the extreme, direct opposition
to the positive impacts of nurturing parents (Saikia,
2017). The negative consequences can range from a
child being neglected of physical needs, up to the point
of being emotionally disturbed and mentally
undeveloped (Hussain & Hussain, 2015). Among all
families, their emotional and social skills are the most
affected due to the lack of a nurturing parental
background (Saikia, 2017). In line with this, such
adolescents begin to develop a bad image of other
parental figures as a reflection of their own separated
parents’ failure to nurture them (Granqvist et al.,
2012). Particularly, such individuals may have a tough
time seeing God as a parent (Bosworth, 2015). In the
same way, these adolescents also have difficulty
relating to their teachers (Verrisimo et al., 2017).
God is considered to be a father-figure in most
religions, especially among Judeo-Christian faiths
(Bosworth, 2015). Because people see God as a
parent, adolescents with broken families may project
their parental experiences on God and develop
cognitive bias and express passive-aggressive
tendencies against similar parental figures (Bosworth,
2015). These, however, may be a reflection of the
adolescents’ experiences with their parents (Granqvist
et al., 2012).The same is true with teachers who are
usually referred to as second parents (Blasco, 2004).
Parental relationship of adolescents could reflect on
their relationship with their teacher. Furthermore, since
an individual’s relationship with their parent is highly
mirrored in their relationship with the teacher, parent-
attachment is therefore almost completely parallel with
one’s relationship with teachers (Verrisimo et al.,
2017).

Unto et al. 23/40

Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
Parental attachment is a term used to describe the
child’s bond with their parents or guardians, in which
the child can respond to the availability, sensitivity,
and responsiveness of the parents (Rabbani et al.,
2014). In the same way, teacher attachment, pertains
to a student’s quality relationship with their teacher
with the feeling of security (Klomek et al., 2015). As
mentioned earlier, parental attachment may reflect on a
person’s God-attachment or the secured and quality
relationship of an individual with God (Bradshaw,
Ellison, & Marcum, 2010). However, parental
attachment and teacher-attachment have been noted to
be similar (Verrisimo et al., 2017). Thus, both parent
and teacher attachment, may be related to a person’s
attachment to God (Williams, 2013).
Despite the claims of the many researchers regarding
the possible association of parental attachment, with an
individual’s teacher attachment God attachment, there
are traces of disagreement with other studies regarding
adolescents with broken families. For example, such
adolescents tend to resort to spirituality, in order to
cope with their family problems (Magpantay et al.,
2014). Study also revealed that individuals with
divorced parents may find God as a replacement of
their negligent parents (Kiesling, 2011). On the other
hand, others report that such adolescents will most
likely have a negative image of God (Bosworth, 2015).
Furthermore, it was observed that 43% of adolescents
seek emotional support from parental-figures such as
religious ministers and school teachers (Magpantay et
al., 2014). This runs contrary to what most researches
claim about adolescents with broken families (Feeney
& Monin, 2008).
Research Questions
The study would like to assess the parental attachment,
teacher attachment, and God attachment of adolescents
with broken families. Specifically, the researchers
would like to answer the following for the quantitative
part of the study:
1. What is the level of the respondents in terms of:
1.1 Parental Attachment;
1.2 Teacher Attachment; and
1.3 God Attachment?
2. Is there a significant relationship among the
respondents’ parental attachment, teacher attachment,
and attachment to God?
Literature Review
Parents are widely perceived by many in simple terms
Unto et al.
of being a father or a mother (Bishop, 2013). Most of
the time, people perceive parents as biologically
related to their sons or daughters (Bishop, 2013).
However, Rathus (2013) claimed that parents are
anyone who nurture and guide children, to lead them
in their holistic growth as a human being. With that
said, Moga (2013) cited some positive impacts of a
parent to a son or daughter. One of the adverse impact
of fathers or mothers to their children is their identity
development (Moga, 2013; Limke and Mayfield,
2011). Parents provide a sense of direction and a set of
norms for their children. They mold the children’s
lives to transform them into a unique person, through
their guidance and careful watch (Moga, 2013). This
was supported by Zhai, Bai, Chen, Han, Wang, Qiao,
and Yang (2015), who claimed that fathers or mothers
set up an environment for their children, wherein they
will yield certain characteristics and behaviors. To
further the explanation, Moga (2013) cited a family
who have a strong religious background. With such
environment, it is most likely that children of such
family would be religious.
In addition to that, parents with such family
background would direct their children’s lives in such
a manner consistent with their religious beliefs (Moga,
2013; Young, 2013). To put it simply, parents mold
their children either directly by being hands-on, or by
creating an environment which will give a central
theme and guidance for their children’s growth (Zhai
and others, 2015; Rathus, 2013). On the other hand,
many contemporary psychologists, especially Neo-
Freudians, also emphasize the undeniable impact of a
parent on an individual’s life (Feist, Feist, and Roberts,
2013; Rathus, 2013). In particular of the Neo-
Freudians, Erik Erikson in Feist and others (2013),
narrated how children in their early childhood, once
nourished properly by their parents, can develop a
basic strength of will. Furthermore, Erikson also
described how children in their play age can develop a
basic strength of purpose, if properly guided by the
family (Feist and others, 2013).
Another Neo-Freudian, namely Melanie Klein,
explained that with the help of parents, children learn
to appreciate the value of human contact and human
relatedness (Feist and others, 2013). This is supported
by Erich Fromm, also a Neo-Freudian, who claimed
that the development of rootedness or the sense of
belonging in this world, is credited to the child’s
mother (Feist and others, 2013). John Bowlby, another
Neo-Freudian stated in his Attachment theory that an
individual’s attachment with his or her parent can be
the basis and foundation of future relationships,
especially with other parental figures (Feist and others,
24/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
2013). A person’s attachment to his or her parents is
claimed to be the “primary attachment” (Feist and
others, 2013). Meanwhile, his concept of the internal
working model explains that once a child sees his or
her parents as nurturing, he or she will also see other
people, especially, other parental figures such as
teachers, as equally nurturing as well (Feist and others,
2013). Bowlby explains that the “attachment” of the
child with his or her parent will be ‘internalized’ to
himself or herself, since they are the first attachment of
the child to any person (Feist and others, 2013). For
the same reason, a child’s attachment to his or her
parent is called a “primary attachment,” while their
attachment with their teachers and other parental
figures as “secondary attachment” (Bergin and Bergin,
2009; Feist and others, 2013; Kremer, 2010).
In line with this, the possible influence of one’s
parental attachment to an individual’s relationship with
God is explained (Granqvist and colleagues, 2012). As
mentioned earlier, attachment theory states that a
person’s relationship with his or her parents can be the
basis of future relationships with other people,
especially with other parental figures (Feist and others,
2013). Interestingly, some adolescents consider God as
a parental figure as well (Bosworth, 2015; Stanford,
2010). With that being said, many literatures claimed
that parent attachment could be related to a person’s
relationship with God (Bosworth, 2015; Bishop,
2013).
There are a lot of positive things to enumerate about
the impact of a parent to his or her son or daughter
(Murkherjee and Mukherjee, 2015). It can range from
a child’s physical and mental development, even to the
point of a child’s achievement of self-actualization
(Mukherjee and Mukherjee, 2015). However, if a
parent has an intensifying positive impact on a child’s
growth and holistic transformation, it is also equally
disparaging and destructive, once the parents lacks or
negatively affect the child’s life (Saikia, 2017; Hussain
and Hussain, 2015)The most prominent individuals
who suffer these negative consequences are
adolescents with broken families (Saikia, 2017; Miller,
Esbensen, and Freng, 2012). A broken family is a term
used for families whose members are separated by
distance, in a considerable amount of time (Saikia,
2017). A broken family may be in the form of a death
of a family member; a parent or a son or daughter in
abroad; or parents who are legally separated (Saikia,
2017). However, Saikia (2017) clarified that the term
‘broken family’ is most commonly used when the
husband and wife is separated, either through a legal
process or unofficial means. The term ‘broken family’
is also associated with children or adolescents who
Unto et al.
grew up with developmental issues, in the process of
the parents’ separation (Saikia, 2017; Hussain and
Hussain, 2015).
According to Saikia (2017), the negative impacts
brought by broken families are the extreme, direct
opposition to the positive impacts of nurturing parents.
The negative consequences can range from a child
being neglected of physical needs, up to the point of
being emotionally disturbed and mentally undeveloped
(Dusek and Ayhan, 2014). No wonder, many negative
stereotypes regarding adolescents with broken families
formed throughout the years (Saikia, 2017).
However,these stereotypes weren’t based from mere
rumors (Saikia, 2017). These stereotypes were
supported by various researches (Saikia, 2017).
One of the most common claims about adolescents
with broken family backgrounds, is their inferior
performance in school (Saikia, 2017). This was
supported by Gartia (2012), who claimed that students
with supporting families academically excel better.
The deficient performance of students with separated
parents can be credited to the lack of guidance by their
mothers or fathers, which in turn, slowed down their
cognitive development (Dusek and Ayhan, 2014). It
was also claimed that conduct problems and
misbehavior were also prominent with adolescents
with broken families (Saikia, 2017). According to
Haegerich, Oman, Vesely, Aspy, and Tolma (2014),
adolescents with separated parents have the tendency
to carry weapons and go in a fight in the streets.
Furthermore, Haegerich and others (2014) narrated
how violence and the use of drugs are becoming more
prominent with these adolescents. On the other hand,
Zhai and others (2015) determined that family
environment is the number one indicator for the
development of suicidal ideations among individuals.
As mentioned earlier by Moga (2013), the
environment created by parents will provide their
children a developmental ground of characteristics and
behavior. Considering that a family environment is
non-nurturing or may be filled with violence, it is
possible that a son or daughter would inadequately
grow and inherit violence (Haegerich and others,
2014). In the case of individuals with suicidal
ideations and with broken family backgrounds, their
environment of hatred and pain cause them to be self-
destructive (Zhaii and others, 2015).
This goes the same for those adolescents who carry
weapons and engage in street fights (Haegerich and
others, 2014). But among all the developmental
aspects of an adolescent with a broken family, his or
25/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
her social skills are the most affected due to the lack of
nurturing parental background (Saikia, 2017). In line
with this, Kiesling (2011) narrated about a cognitive
dissonance regarding the said adolescents’ perception
with all parents. According to Saikia (2017),
adolescents with broken families begin to develop a
bad image of other parents and other parental figures,
as a reflection of their own separated parents’ failure
to nurture. Particularly speaking, Bosworth (2015) and
Sinnott (2010) claimed that such individuals have a
tough time seeing God as a parent.
In the same way, these adolescents also have difficulty
relating to their teachers (Verissimo, Torres, Silva,
Fernandes, Vaughn, and Santos, 2017). According to
Bosworth (2015) and Miner (2009), God is considered
to be a father-figure in most religions. Generally
speaking, the concept of a ‘god’ is about a deity who
loves and cares for its people (Stanford, 2010). With
such concept about God, individuals therefore see Him
as a parent (Bosworth, 2015). In fact, people even
believe that God must be a role model for fathers and
mothers (Bishop, 2013).
Especially, fathers play a significant role in a child’s
development (Monteiro, Verissimo, Vaughn, Santos,
Torres, and Fernandes, 2010). With that being said,
Bosworth (2015) claimed that because people see God
as a parent, adolescents with broken families will
project their parental experiences to God. As explained
by Bishop (2013) and Kiesling (2011), if an
adolescent’s parents are good and nurturing, in turn,
this adolescent will see God as good and nurturing as
well. But if the parents are negligent, punishing, and
cruel, an adolescent will see God in the same way
(Bishop, 2013). Sinnott (2010) explained that it is for
the same reason as to why many adolescents are
becoming atheists.
Once an unfortunate event such as getting a low score
in an exam or being bullied at school plagued an
adolescent, he or she will credit the misery to God
(Granqvist, Broberg, and Hagekull, 2014). Themes
such as ‘God wasn’t there for me when I needed Him’
and ‘He abandoned me’ are common among these
adolescents (Bosworth, 2015; Kimball, Boyatzis,
Cook, Leonard, and Flanagan, 2013). But in reality,
these words are the reflection of the adolescents’
experiences with negligent parents who may have
separated (Bishop, 2013; Cassibba, Grangvist, and
Constantini, 2013; Lang, 2013; Grangqvist,
Mikulincer, Gewirtz, and Shaver, 2012). The same is
true with the said adolescents’ teachers (Verissimo and
others, 2017; Riley, 2011). As colloquially dubbed by
many, teachers are referred to as the second fathers
Unto et al.
and mothers of children (Verissimo and others, 2017).
However, such definition becomes truer in essence for
adolescents, especially the number of hours they spend
per day is mostly with their teachers (Verissimo and
others, 2017). On the other hand, Kremer (2010) and
Murray (2009) mentioned the importance of parental
relationship of adolescents, for it could reflect on their
relationship with their teacher. Furthermore, if such is
the case, it will also lead to a poor performance at
school (Murray, 2009). However, Murray (2009) also
claimed that having a bad relationship or a negative
image of the teacher will also lead to an adolescent’s
developmental inhibition. Particularly, their emotional
and social skills will be affected (Kremer, 2010;
Murray, 2009).
With regards to the emotional aspect of this
adolescent, the feelings brought by the teacher to the
adolescent will trigger certain parental issues and
experiences (Split, Koomen, and Harrison, 2015;
Kremer, 2010; Murray, 2009). Say, if the teacher was
too strict and unsupportive, the adolescent will be
reminded of his or her parents, who possibly happened
to be the same (Murray, 2009). No wonder, themes
such as ‘My teacher is too controlling’ and ‘I always
get embarrassed in the class’ are present with these
adolescents (Murray, 2009). To put it simply, it is
claimed by researchers that a parental conflict is
reflected in an adolescent’s relationship with the
teacher (Murray, 2009; Baker, Grant, and Morlock,
2008). Verschueren, Doumen, and Buyse (2012) and
Kremer (2010) explained that since an individual’s
relationship with his or her parent is highly mirrored in
his or her relationship with the teacher, the so-called
“parent-attachment” is therefore almost parallel, if not
completely parallel with the so-called “teacher-
attachment”.
“Parent-attachment” is a technical term used to
describe the quality of a child’s relationship with his or
her parents (Kremer, 2010; Sim and Yow, 2010). In
the same way, “teacher-attachment” pertains to a
student’s quality relationship with his or her teachers
(Kremer, 2010). Both the “parent-attachment” and the
“teacher-attachment” can be indicative of an
individual’s way of relating with other people
(Verrisimo and others, 2015; Sierra, 2012; Buyse,
Verschueren, and Doumen, 2011; Kiesling, 2011). As
mentioned earlier, parental attachment may reflect on a
person’s “God-attachment” or quality relationship of
an individual with God (Saikia, 2017; Kiesling, 2011;
Bradshaw, Ellison, and Marcum, 2010). However, it
was also explained that the mechanics of “parent-
attachment” and “teacher-attachment” are the same
(Verrisimo and others, 2015; Kiesling, 2011).With that
26/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
being said, by theory, “teacher-attachment” could also
be related to a person’s “God-attachment” (Wiliams,
2013), in the same way “parent-attachment” can reflect
a person’s attachment to God (Saikia, 2017; Kiesling,
2011).
Interestingly, Sabol and Pianta (2012) and Kremer
(2010) claimed that there is a small number of
researches regarding teacher-student relationships,
when dealing the matter regarding attachment. In the
same way, Williams (2013) claimed that there is
almost no research regarding the relationship of
“teacher-attachment” and “God-attachment”. In
addition to that, despite the claims of the many
researchers regarding the possible effect of parental
and teacher attachment to an individual’s attachment
to God (Saikia, 2017; Verrisimo and others, 2015;
Williams, 2013; Kiesling, 2011), there are traces of
disambiguation with other studies regarding
adolescents with broken families. For example,
Magpantay, Malabrigo, Malijan, and Manarin (2014)
discovered that adolescents with broken families tend
to resort to spirituality, in order to cope with their
family problems. It was also discovered that these
adolescents find God as a replacement of their
negligent parents (Magpantay and others, 2014). In
fact, in a study made by Zeratsion, Dalskley, Bjertness,
Lien, Haveet, Halvorsen, and Claussen (2013), it was
discovered that adolescents with broken families have
an elevated level of spirituality. Such claims are in
direct opposite of Saikia (2017), Bosworth (2015) and
Kiesling (2011), who mentioned that such adolescents
will most likely have a negative image of God.
Furthermore, Magpantay and others (2014) narrated
how 43% of their samples seek emotional support
from parental-figures such as religious ministers and
school teachers. Again, this is in direct opposition of
what Murray (2009) mentioned earlier. Such
proposition is supported by Zeratsion and others
(2013), who explained that adolescents with broken
families are learning to reach out for help, especially
from people who could stand as their alternative
parental figures, such as teachers.
Methodology
Participants
Using purposive sampling, two hundred (200)
participants were recruited for the quantitative part of
the study. The participants must be adolescents with
separated biological parents who detached from one
another to end their matrimonial relationship, and not
due to migration or death. The respondents’ parents
Unto et al.
must not be a widow or a widower. The participant
must be currently enrolled as a student and a believer
in a deity. The age range of adolescents used in this
study was between 12-18, which is in line with Erik
Erikson’s definition (Feist et al., 2013). Out of the 200
participants recruited in the study, only 171 made it to
the final analysis. 29 participants were removed from
the sample pool, as they failed to answer several items
in the instruments used for this study. Meanwhile,
criterion-based sampling was used in the qualitative
part of the study. The criteria used for selecting the
participants are the same with the quantitative part of
the study. Confirming and disconfirming sampling was
also used to acquire 10 respondents, in which half of
them comprised of those who scored low in parental
attachment, while the other half was comprised of
those who scored the high in the said variable.
Instruments of the Study
Three instruments were used to gather the data for the
quantitative part of the research. Namely, they are
Parental-Child Attachment – Rochester Youth
Development Study (PCA-RYDS), Attachment to
Teacher- Rochester Youth Development Study (ATT-
RYDS) and Attachment to God Inventory (AGI).
Parental-Child Attachment – Rochester Youth
Development Study (PCA-RYDS) is comprised of 11
questions, answerable by a Likert scale, in which 4 is
the highest and 1 is the lowest. It measures the degree
of the warmth and lack of hostility in the parent-child
relationship, among youths. It was developed by
Lizotte, Krohn, Farnworth, and Jang in 1991. It has an
internal consistency of 0.87 (Dahlberg, Toal, Swahn,
and Behrens, 2005).
Attachment to Teacher (ATT-RYDS) is a five-item
inventory, with a Likert scale in which 4 is the highest
and 1 is the lowest, except for one item, in which 3 is
the highest. The said questionnaire aims to measure
how much the respondents like and respect their
teachers. The instruments was developed by Smith,
Lizotte, Thornberry, and Krohn in 1991. ATT-RYDS
has an internal consistency of 0.63-0.78 (Dahlberg,
Toal, Swahn, and Behrens, 2005).
Attachment to God Inventory (AGI) is a 28-item
questionnaire, with a Likert scale in which 7 is the
highest and 1 is the lowest. AGI measures an
individual’s perceived attachment or relationship with
a deity. AGI was developed by Beck and McDonald. It
has an internal consistency of 0.84 and a has a good
construct validity. On the other hand, AGI can be
administered to adolescents to adults. AGI have two
27/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
facets, namely Avoidance of Intimacy and Anxiety of
Abandonment. Scoring low on the said facets indicate
a secure and stable relationship with God (Beck and
McDonald, 2004).
For the qualitative part, semi-structured question
validated by four psychology professionals were used
to interview the participants.
Procedure
The data gathered with the questionnaires were entered
and analyzed by the statistical package for social
sciences (SPSS). Descriptive statistics was used to
determine the participants’ mean scores and standard
deviation in Parental Attachment, Teacher Attachment,
God Attachment (Anxiety of Abandonment and
Attachment Avoidance of Intimacy). Meanwhile,
Pearson correlation was used in order to correlate the
four variables.
After acquiring the results for the quantitative part of
the study, thematic analysis was used to analyze the
interview answers of the participants. The researchers
followed the six steps in accomplishing thematic
analysis, as described by Braun and Clark (2013) in
Maguire and Delahunt (2017). After getting familiar
with the data, the interview answers of the participants
were coded or extracted meaning from. From these
codes, themes were determined by the researchers.
These themes were reviewed and defined afterwards,
to which the major themes were further broken down
into subthemes. After the completion of the data
analysis for both the quantitative and qualitative part
of the study, the researchers integrated both analyzed
data.
Ethical Considerations
The privacy and the confidentiality of the participants
were secured. The participants who participated in the
study were given the right to withdraw anytime during
the process. The participants were given full rights and
protection about the results. Aside from acquiring the
informed consent of the participants, their parents or
guardians’ consent were acquired as well, to provide a
wider scope of safety on the part of the participants.
For the qualitative part of the study, the participants
were given new sets of informed consent and parental
consent. Likewise, participants were informed about
the nature and purpose of the study and were assured
that their privacy and confidentiality were protected.
During the interview process, the participants were
given the right to withdraw should they feel any form
of uneasiness on the questions being asked. This study
Unto et al.
also underwent an ethical review in Holy Angel
University’s Institutional Review Board prior data
gathering.
Results
The total sample size recruited for the study was 200
participants. However, 29 of the respondents failed to
answer several items in the instruments, and thus were
removed from the sample pool for the final analysis. A
total of 171 participants remained for the data analysis.
With the aid of a statistician, the test of preliminary
data was accomplished. The skewness and the kurtosis
of the sample pool was analyzed to check for outliers
in the samples. Based on the table above, Parental
Attachment has .285 skewness, which is below 0.5,
indicating the sample is approximately symmetric
(Brown, 2016). The same goes for God Attachment
Anxiety, with -0.031 skewness, the sample is also
assumed to be symmetric (Brown, 2016). However, for
Teacher Attachment with a skewness of -0.539, and
God Attachment Avoidance with 0.537 skewness, it
can be inferred that the sample is moderately skewed
(Brown, 2016). Nevertheless, both Teacher
Attachment and God Attachment fall below a
skewness of 1, and their sample pool is still considered
a good set of data (Brown, 2016).
On the other hand, Parental Attachment (k=-0.079)
and God Attachment Anxiety (k=-0.148) both have
negative values for their kurtosis. This implies that
both variables are left-tailed (Brown, 2016). On the
contrary, Teacher Attachment (k=1.713) and God
Attachment Avoidance (k=0.394) have positive values
for their kurtosis, which indicates they are right-tailed
(Brown, 2016). Nevertheless, all variables have a
kurtosis value less than 3, and therefore are considered
platykurtic, meaning they produce fewer extreme
outliers (Brown, 2016). With both the skewness and
kurtosis presented, the study’s sample pool has more
or less normal distribution.
Table 1. Skewness and Kurtosis of the Sample Pool
After Data Cleaning
28/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
The instruments used for this study do not have a
designated interpretation to categorize the respondents
based on their results. Norming was accomplished
with the aid of a statistician in order to acquire the
interpretation for the participants’ score. The
instruments were divided into five (5) percentiles. The
minimum and the maximum scores were also acquired
to accomplish the norming.
Most respondents have an average Parental
Attachment (f=55, 32%), but it is noteworthy that a
majority of the sample also scored high and very high
on the said variable. In the same way, most
participants have an average Teacher Attachment
(f=42, 25%). Respondents who scored very high
(f=41, 24%) and low (f=40) on Teacher Attachment
are comparably similar. For God Attachment Anxiety,
most respondents scored very high (f=38, 22%).
However, it must be noted that for the said variable,
respondents have close scores. Similarly, most
participants scored high in God Attachment Avoidance
(f=36, 21%).
Table 2. Frequency of Levels of Parental Attachment,
Teacher Attachment, God Attachment Anxiety, and
God Attachment Avoidance of Adolescents with
Broken Families on a Quintile Distribution
Table 3 shows the mean or average attachment scores
of participants in terms of their parental attachment
(x=27.10), teacher attachment (x=13.94) and God
attachment (x=46.78; x=43.20). Based on the quintile
distribution obtained from the norming, the
participants’ mean attachment score to their parents,
teachers, and God fall within the average.
Unto et al.
Table 3. Mean and Standard Deviation of Parental
Attachment, Teacher Attachment, God Attachment
Anxiety, and God Attachment Avoidance of
Adolescents with Broken Families
Parental Attachment positively correlated with
Teacher Attachment (p=.001). Meanwhile, it
negatively correlated with God Attachment Anxiety
(p=.007) and God Attachment Avoidance (p=.002).
Parental Attachment has a weak correlation with
Teacher Attachment (R=.243), God Attachment
Anxiety (R=-0.204) and God Attachment Avoidance
(R=-0.237), but all were highly significant
(Chowdhurry, Debsarkar and Chakrabarty, 2015). On
the other hand, Teacher Attachment negatively and
weakly correlated with God Attachment Avoidance
(p=.027; R=- 0.170) (Chowdhurry and others, 2015).
However, Teacher Attachment didn’t have a
significant correlation with God Attachment Anxiety.
Table 4. Correlation of Parental Attachment, Teacher
Attachment, God Attachment Anxiety, and God
Attachment Avoidance of Adolescents with Broken
Families
For the qualitative part of this study, six major themes
were extracted after using thematic analysis.
Significant statements were derived from the
participants’ interview responses, from which codes or
meanings and themes emerged. Six major themes
surfaced from the analysis using triangulation. These
themes were also certified by an external validator.
The seven major themes are 1) Difficulties with being
29/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
in a Broken family, 2) Efforts to Maintain Family
Relations, 3) Forming Relationship with Teachers, 4)
Forming relationship with God, 5) Parental Duty as
Core of Relationship, and 6) Comparing Roles of
Parents, Teachers, and God.
Difficulties with being in a Broken Family
Table 5. First Major Theme: Difficulties with being in
a Broken Family
This theme frequently emerged from the participants.
This describes the difficulties encountered by the
participants in a non-intact family set-up. These
difficulties often revolve around how the participants
interact with their parents. These hardships also
describe the current family set-up of the participants.
Participants often point out that they have no or less
intimate contact with their parents. For example,
Participant A narrated his experience with his father.
“Then kay dad kasi once ko pa lang siya nakita nung
Grade 7 ako. May communication naman pero wala
pang kasiguraduhan kung kelan kami next magkikita.”
In the same way, Participant G mentioned, “…’yung
father ko hindi ko pa po sya nakita, pati hindi pa
nakausap.” With these statements, the subtheme
Difficulty Maintaining Relationship emerged.
Furthermore, participants also narrated how disorderly
their family set-up is. As Participant J recounted,
“Magulo po. Kasi lagi po’ng nag-aaway si dada at si
mama. ‘Yung stepfather ko po.” However, Participant
C narrated that even among their siblings, arguments
arise, “...minsan nakakaranas din ng pag-aaway sa
aming magkakapatid.” From these statements, the
subtheme Chaotic Family Set-up surfaced.
Unto et al.
It is also interesting to take note that participants have
different parental set-ups. Other participants live with
one of their biological parents, just like Participant D
who mentioned, “Uhm, daddy nalang—si daddy
nalang ‘yung kasama namin.” Meanwhile, there are
others who live with their stepparents and step
siblings. One example would be Participant E who
narrated, “… uhm ngayon po kasama, uhm kasama ko
po yung mother ko, and then yung step-father and
yung pong kapatid ko po sa nanay ko.” From these
statements, the subtheme Differing Family Set-ups
surfaced.
Efforts to Maintain Family Relations
Table 6. Second Major Theme: Efforts to Maintain
Family Relations
This theme describes the efforts of the participants and
their parents in maintaining a good relationship to
some degree, despite the marital separation. This
theme also describes how the participants achieved
some sort of normality in their relationship with their
parents and their new family, after their biological
parents’ separation. The efforts mentioned in this
theme show a connection with the major theme,
Difficulties with being in a Broken Family. The
parental distance and the chaotic family set-up of the
participants led them to exert efforts to maintain
family relations.
For example, Participant G described that after his
parents separated, he still maintained a good
relationship with his mother, “Mother ko po, yung
relationship po namin okay lang po.” In the same way,
Participant A narrated that prior the marital separation,
he was already closely engaged with his mother and
maintained the same quality relationship, “…'yung kay
mom ko kasi talaga as in close kami. Uh nakakapag
open up ako sa kanya if may problems ako.”
Meanwhile, as mentioned, some participants
30/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
maintained some sort of normality regarding their
relationships with their parents and new family.
Participant H described, “Sa Family ko po, okay
naman kahit papano. Kulang man pero parang normal
nalang din. Siguro nasanay nalang.” Similarly,
Participant J described, “Masaya. Kahit may
problema. Ganun. Okay lang naman po kami.” The
participants’ family situation is described in the direct
words of Participant D, “Medyo okay naman.”
Forming Relationship with Teachers
Table 7. Third Major Theme: Forming Relationship
with Teachers
This major theme describes how the participants felt
parenting with their teachers. This theme also tackles
how participants perceived their teachers, aside from
seeing them as a parent. This major theme also
presents how participants relate with their teachers
closer than with their actual mothers and fathers.
In direct words, Participant H described, “I see my
teacher like a parent.” Participants described their
teacher advisers as their second parents, though
manifested in different ways. For example, Participant
A recounted how his teacher adviser cared for them in
accomplishing difficult tasks, “I see her as my mom,
second mom. Kasi talaga yung effort niya sa’min, lalo
na ngayon inuulan kami ng PETA (performance
task)…”
It is noteworthy to emphasize that participants also
point out how their teachers guide them, similar with
Participant I’s narration, “...Tapos a’yun po, nasabi ko
po lahat ng problem namin, pati po ‘yung financial.
A’yun po. Binigyan niya po ako ng advise, hanggang
in-okay ko na po hanggang Grade 10.” It is interesting
Unto et al.
to take note that some participants claimed that they
are more comfortable telling their problems to their
teachers than their biological parents. When
Participant J was asked to whom she usually opens her
problem, she answered, “Teacher po. Kay mama, ‘di
po masyado…”
Lastly, it is interesting to take note that some
participants see their teachers as their close friend. As
narrated by Participant I when asked about how he
relates with his teacher, he answered, “Uhm, parang
barkada, ganun”. This is echoed with Participant H’s
narration, “Parang barkada at the same time guardian
kasi the way na i-guide and advise ka niya in times of
difficulties or problems is parang same way ng isang
caring parent.”
Forming Relationship with God
Table 8. Fourth Major Theme: Forming Relationship
with God
This theme describes how respondents form a
relationship with God. Participants have various
concepts about God and personal ways on how to
connect with Him. It must be noted that this theme is
one of those which surfaced frequently from the
participants’ statements.
Among the subthemes that emerged from this major
theme, God as Counselor is a highlight. As related by
Participant G, “Parang siya po yung adviser ko yung
parang kapag may problem ako siya yung nalalapitan
31/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
ko. Kapag kailngan ko ng kausap gano’n po.”
Participant F also recounted, “Siya yung taga-gabay
ko sa buhay, siya yung nagtuturo sa akin kung ano
yung tama o mali at kung ano yung tamang daan.”
Meanwhile, Participant I perceives God as someone
whom she can open her problems to, “‘Yun po, uhm,
mas madalas ko po’ng nasasabi kay God ‘yung
problema ko.”
Another prominent subtheme is God as a Source of
Strength. Participant B narrated how he draws strength
from God, “…Kasi ‘pag ‘di ko na talaga kaya,
nagdadasal ako.” Similarly, Participant G recounted,
“Parang sa kanya din po ako humuhugot ng lakas
para 'yun po makapag-aral kase wala man po
sumusupporta sa akin sa Family ko.” Similarly, some
participants see God as a Helper. Participant B
recounted, “Makakapag-open ka, matutulungan ka
niya ‘pag may problem ka.‘Pag may mga problema
ako, nagpe-pray ako.”
However, there are also instances in which participants
experience a Periods of Shaky Relationship with God.
For example, Participant E recounted, “...siyempre po
minsan may mga times na manghihina, yung parang
manlalamig ka kay God. Meron din na nag-aapoy ka
ganun.” Similarly, Participant F narrated, “…parang
sa part na ito medyo mabigat and baka mapaiyak ako
kase yung relationship ko kay God dati okay eh,
parang on fire pa. Parang kilalang-kilala ko pa siya
pero parang ngayon nanlamig na ako.”
Parental Duty as Core of Relationship
Table 9. Fifth Major Theme: Parental Duty as Core of
Relationship
Participants put value in the parental duties of their
mothers and fathers, and consider these parental
responsibilities as a basis for the warmth of their
relationship. This theme describes either the parents’
Unto et al.
constant support for the participants temporal or
emotional needs. Contrary to other themes, this theme
is not as prominent. It is important to note that this
theme surfaced from the participants’ response about
their current relationship with their parents.
Some participants described that their parents still
provide their temporal needs after the marital
separation. For example, Participant I described his
father providing for her needs by giving her money,
“Meron naman po. Nagsusustento naman po siya.”
However, the same participant admitted that he only
has the chance to contact with her father whenever she
sends her allowance, “Tapos si papa naman po,
nakakausap ko lang po kapag magpapadala po siya ng
pera.”
Meanwhile, some participants still maintained
openness and a constant emotional support from their
parents. This is evident with Participant E who
recounted, “Ano po, kahit na yung hindi po ganun na,
I mean yung, yung andyan pa rin po sila sa inyo no
matter what happen po, ganun.” In the same way,
Participant J still perceives concern from his parents,
“Opo. Nakikita ko naman sa kanila. ‘Yung kapag
nagpupuyat, ganun. Sasabihin nila, “’Wag ka’ng
magpuyat, kasi nakakasama sa’yo ‘yun, ganun.”
Comparing Roles of Parents, Teachers, and God
Table 10. Sixth Major Theme: Comparing Roles of
Parents, Teachers, and God
This major theme tackles the similarities that the
participants see among their parents, teachers and God.
Most statements tackle how they see both their
teachers and God as parental figures who give
guidance. It must be noted that most subthemes
formed from the participants’ statement, point out how
the participants see their advisers and God as
personages who teach. These subthemes are namely
Teacher and God Teach Values and Teacher and God
as Counselors. This theme also shows connection with
the previous themes, Forming Relationship with
32/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
Teachers, Forming Relationship with God, and
Parental Duty as Core of Relationship. Subthemes
which emerged from this major theme shows
comparison between the perceived dynamics of
relationship of the participants with their parents,
teachers, and God.
As mentioned, participants see both their teachers and
God in teaching values. Participant A described how
she learned the value of not letting anger be deeply
rooted in oneself, “Simula nung nahingi ko guidance
ni God and siyempre ng adviser ko, natutunan ko na
yung pag-kikimkim.” On the other hand, Participant I
narrated how his teacher is encouraging and
counselling him to be closer to his parent. He
described, “Opo. Kasi po ano, ‘yung teacher ko,
nilalapit ng teacher ko ‘yung sarili ko sa parents ko.”
Meanwhile, the same participant perceives his
teacher’s support as God’s way for him to change,
“Noong na-parent needed po ako, imbis na pagalitan
po ako, ganun, mas binigyan po ako ng advise kung
ano po ang dapat ko’ng gawin at ‘di na po dapat
gawin. Tapos, parang, ‘yun ‘yung way po ni God na
magbago ako.”
Meanwhile, another subtheme describes the similarity
observed by participants between their parents and
God. Based on the statements, they see both their
parents and God as providers. As Participant J
described, being provided by parents felt like by being
provided by God, “When I ask for what I need, I
receive [from them].” In a similar way, Participant D
narrated that whenever his father provides him money,
he feels like it’s God’s way of proving for him, “Yes.
Yes, I see [the similarity with God and may dad],
especially when dad provides me money.”
Similar with the quantitative results of the study,
qualitative findings show that participants’ attachment
to their parents, to teachers, and to God, are often
reflected with each other. It is a particular highlight
that participants’ relationship with their teachers
provide them with the most impact.
As mentioned earlier in the major theme, Comparing
Roles of Parents, Teachers, and God, most
respondents established a deeper sense of relationship
with their teachers than their parents. Based on the
subthemes that emerged, participants also made more
associations to God with their teachers more than their
parents. The qualitative findings of this study further
supported the quantitative results, which emphasized
the correlation among the parental attachment, teacher
Unto et al.
attachment, and God attachment of participants.
Discussion
Most researches point out that adolescents with broken
families have lower secure parental attachment
compared to those with intact family backgrounds
(Saikia, 2017). In the same way, Eagan (2004)
reported that these adolescents may have poor
attachment in their future relationships with their
teachers and peers. Aifuwa (2016) supports the
previous statement, emphasizing how such adolescents
may develop an insecure attachment with God. But for
this study, the participants fall within the average
range in terms of their attachment with their parents,
teachers, and God. Such results are contradictory to
most researches about the attachment of children
whose parents separated (Eagan, 2004). Feeny and
Monin (2008) and Eagan (2004) pointed that the
attachment level of adolescents with broken families
often differ in researches. Just like the results acquired
by Eagan (2004), adolescents with broken families fall
under the normal or average range in terms of their
attachment with parental figures. Feeny and Monin
(2008) explained that individual adjustment is a big
factor for the level of attachment of such adolescents.
In the case of this study’s participants, they have
claimed in their interview that they have already found
a sense of normality in their new family set-up after
their parents separated.
On the other hand, Zeratsion and colleagues (2013)
claimed that adolescents with separated parents don’t
seem to have any increased relationship problems
compared to those with intact families. In addition to
this, Magpantay, Malabrigo, Malijan, and Manarin
(2014) pointed that such adolescents usually form
attachments in their teachers and God as a form of
defense mechanism. Both studies of Magpantay and
colleagues (2014), Zeratsion and others (2013)
claimed that adolescents with broken families do not
necessarily have lower attachment levels. Feeney and
Monin (2008) also explained that John Bowlby,
proponent of Attachment Theory, suggested two
possible outcomes if a child is separated from his or
her parent. As many researchers suggest, a child
separated from a parent will most likely have an
insecure attachment, leading to avoidant and anxious
relationships in the future (Contois, Cyr, Lessard, and
Poulin, 2013; Feeny and Monin, 2008). But John
Bowlby also suggested that this may not always be the
case (Feeney and Monin, 2008). As explained by
Aifuwa (2016) and Eagan (2004), an early and good
parenting style matters more than the family structure
33/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
to predict one’s parental attachment. Thus, even if a
child’s parents separated, but a good parenting style
and good communication are maintained, parental
attachment will remain stable and secure (Aifuwa,
2016).
For this research, some of the participants interviewed
have at least one parent still accompanying them and
sustaining their needs. It must also be noted that while
the family structure of the participants is
diverse—wherein some are living with one parent, and
some are living with their step parents, these
participants still have a certain level of closeness with
their biological parents. Such results point out to what
John Bowlby is pointing out in a dyadic relationship
(Feist, Feist, and Roberts, 2013). John Bowlby
suggested that a dyadic relationship, or an intimate
relationship between two people, specifically between
a parent and child, is what matters most when it comes
to the separation of the child from the parent (Feeny
and Monin, 2008). Echoing what Eagan (2004)
discovered among his participants, it doesn’t matter if
the parents separated and the child is separated from
his parents by distance. As long as the child has been
provided a good parenting style in his or her early
years and communication is maintained, parental
attachment will remain stable and secure (Feist, Feist,
and Roberts, 2013; Feeny and Monin, 2008). For that
matter, the child’s relationship with others, particularly
with parental figures such as teachers and God, will
remain the same (Aifuwa, 2016; Eagan, 2004).
To put it simply, participants having an average
attachment to their parents, to their teachers, and to
God may be attributed to individual adjustments and
the level of parental closeness they have prior and after
their parents’ separation (Feeny and Monin, 2008;
Eagan, 2004). Their level of attachment is within the
normal range compared to others whose family is
intact (Eagan, 2004). However, despite such results, it
doesn’t invalidate the fact these adolescents are more
prone to internalized negative images of parents
(Saikia, 2017; Contois and colleagues, 2013). But as
Feeny and Monin (2008) said, these adolescents have
greater likelihood to have future problems with
attachment and relationship, but they don’t necessarily
have to be like that.
On the other hand, the results of this study show that
Parental Attachment is positively correlated with
Teacher Attachment, and is negatively correlated with
God Attachment Avoidance of Intimacy and God
Attachment Anxiety of Abandonment. Meanwhile,
Teacher Attachment negatively correlated with God
Attachment Avoidance of Intimacy and not with God
Unto et al.
Attachment Anxiety of Abandonment. These results
point out to what John Bowlby called as the internal
working model (Feist and others, 2013). Bowlby
explained the existence of an attachment bond between
two people (Fenny and Monin, 2008). Such attachment
bond can be explained through a biological-
evolutionary lens (Fenny and Monin, 2008). Bowlby
narrated that this attachment bond is formed between
two people, which serves as a source of protection,
safety, and nurturing environment (Aifuwa, 2016;
Granqvist, Broberg, and Hagekull, 2014). This
attachment bond also serves as a refuge for the people
involved in the relationship (Feeny and Monin, 2008).
As Bowlby describe, a person to whom an individual
can run to is a safe haven that provides comfort and
security (Feist and others, 2013; Feeny and Monin,
2008).
The attachment bond of a person during his early years
is internalized, thus an internal working model of
parental figures is formed (Feist and others, 2013).
From the very words of Bowlby, human beings are apt
do to others what are done to them (Feeny and Monin,
2008). Such words are important to remember as
Bowlby’s theory goes back to the importance of
psychoanalysis’ influence in his theory (Feeny and
Monin, 2008). Psychoanalysis talks about the
importance of childhood and internalization of events
in one’s life, and such is the core foundation of
Bowlby’s theory. (Feist and colleagues, 2013) The
said proponent believes that one’s parental attachment
becomes the representation of how relationships work
(Feist and colleagues, 2013). But more specifically,
Bowlby explained that one’s parental attachment
becomes an internalized model of other parental
figures (Aifuwa, 2016; Granqvist and others, 2014).
For this matter, this explains the results why the
variables of this study namely Parental Attachment,
Teacher Attachment, God Attachment Avoidance of
Intimacy, and God Attachment Anxiety of
Abandonment, are correlated (Feeny and Monin,
2008). First, it is important to highlight that Parental
Attachment and Teacher Attachment, albeit their low
correlation, nevertheless have the strongest correlation
compared to other pairs of variables. This is important
to highlight, since there’s a strong connection between
parents and teachers which Bowlby dubbed as the
primary and secondary attachment figures of children
(Kremer, 2010; Bergin and Bergin, 2009).
Primary attachments are basically the biological
parents of the child (Kremer, 2010). Meanwhile,
secondary attachments are those whom an individual
wants to build a life-long relationship, which can
provide them security, aside from their original parents
34/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
(Kremer, 2010; Bergin and Bergin, 2009). As Bowlby
defined, these secondary attachment figures are
usually parental figures, and for that no reason, it’s no
wonder that teachers are considered as the secondary
attachment figures (Kremer, 2010). According to
Verissimo, Torres, Silva, Fernandes, Vaughn, and
Santos (2017), it is common for students to see their
teachers as their second parents, since that’s what
basically a teacher is, which is also manifested in the
qualitative findings of this study. In addition, there’s a
lot of similarity between parents and teachers that
students see (Verissimo and others, 2017). Some of
these similarities that were discovered in this study are
the caring attitude of the teachers, their teaching of
values, their acts of disciplining, and the concern for
the welfare of their students.
For this reason, it is so easy for adolescents to think
that how their parents are is also how their teachers are
(Kremer, 2010). In addition to this, Verissimo and
others (2017) further explained that there is usually
cooperation between the parents and teachers to rear
the child’s development. For this matter, a child
usually associates his or her teacher as a parent
(Verissimo and colleagues, 2017). At some point, a
child collectively sees his or her father or mother and
teacher as parents. (Granqvist and others, 2014). To
put it simply, the impact of teachers to students are
intense to the point that students no longer see their
teachers as parental figures, rather, they perceive their
teachers as their actual parents (Verissimo and others,
2017).
On the other hand, results also show that one’s
attachment to parents is inversely correlated with one’s
anxious and avoidant attachment to God. This could be
explained by first defining the concept of individuals
to a deity (Aifuwa, 2016). In many religious cultures
especially in Judeo-Christian traditions, God is
considered as a father (Bosworth, 2015; Stanford,
2010). However, as time progressed, the concept of
God grew to more positive images, emphasizing God’s
role as a parent (Stanford, 2010). In some cultures,
God’s act of love is felt by devotees as a manifestation
of mother’s love (Stanford, 2010). There are various
interpretations of God’s manifestation in different
religions, but it all things down to the fact that people
see God as a loving parent (Bosworth, 2015; Stanford,
2010).
Using Bowlby’s internal working model, this explains
why parental attachment is negatively correlated with
an anxious and avoidance God attachment of an
individual (Sim and Yow, 2010). It was earlier
presented that how a child perceives his or her parental
Unto et al.
attachment will be the basis for future relationships,
especially with parental figures (Feeny and Monin,
2008). Such explanation goes the same to describe
how one’s attachment to parents are reflected to one’s
attachment to God (Feeny and Monin, 2008). If one
feels secure and safe to his or her parents, he or she
will feel the same with God (Feeny and Monin, 2008).
Since Bowlby’s attachment theory is highly encored to
psychoanalysis, it is also important to look at Freud’s
perspective in this matter (Aifuwa, 2016). According
to Freud in Aifuwa (2016), one’s attachment to God is
just a projection of one’s relationship with one’s
father. This may explain why some participants in
Murray’s (2009) study narrated that they felt God
abandoned them when their father left them.
For the results of this study, it is also important to
highlight that Teacher Attachment negatively
correlated with God Attachment Avoidance of
Intimacy, but did not have a significant correlation
with God Attachment Anxiety of Abandonment. This
is important to take note since the two aspects of God
attachment, which are avoidance of intimacy and
anxiety of abandonment, they have their own basis for
their development (Bergin and Bergin, 2009). For
example, the avoidance of intimacy can be based from
parental figures, but anxiety of abandonment is highly
based on one’s biological parents, since they are the
primary caregivers (Bergin and Bergin, 2009). This is
exactly the case between Teacher Attachment and God
Attachment Anxiety of Abandonment. The two
variables didn’t correlate since the anxiety of
abandonment is based on an individual’s primary
caregivers, and not to parental figures such as teachers
(Bergin and Bergin, 2009). To put it simply, it is most
likely impossible for someone to feel abandoned by
God because his or her teacher abandoned him or her,
when in the very first place, the anxiety is only
provoked by primary caregivers (Bergin and Bergin,
2009).
Among the themes that emerged from the participants’
interview, the theme Difficulties with being in a
Broken family was the most prominent. This theme
described the difficulties encountered by the
participants after their parents separated. The theme
also provides possible insight as to what influences the
participants’ attachment to their teachers and to God. It
is noteworthy to take note that most participants that
were interviewed narrated a distant relationship with
their fathers. Some participants’ biological fathers
never had a contact with them after their parental
separation. Meanwhile, there are some participants
whose fathers provide them their financial need, but
often lack the regular contact and deeper interactions.
35/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
There are some participants whose father stayed with
them, but whose relationship is unstable. On the other
hand, there are participants who have similar
experiences with their mother. There are others whose
mothers they never had contact with. But meanwhile,
there are others who have at least some form of contact
left.
Such family set-ups are just like what Saikia (2017)
and Feeny and Monin (2008) described. These
adolescents have diverse family set-ups after their
parental separation. What is interesting about the
results is that these diverse participants interviewed
have diverse scores in their parental attachment. But in
the end, those who scored either low or high in
parental attachment stated in the interview that they
have a firm relationship with their teachers. In fact,
they find themselves closer with their teachers, thus
forming another prominent major theme, Forming
Relatioship with Teachers.
On the other hand, Verschueren, Doumen, and Buyse
(2012) and by Riley (2011) explained that the firmer
relationship of the participants with their teachers than
their parents is most likely attributed to how these
adolescents create an image of their teachers. This is in
line with Verissimo and others (2017) who explained
that these adolescents see their teachers not just as
parental figures, but rather, their actual parents. It is
further explained by Bergin and Bergin (2009) who
stated teachers are not just the second parents of
students, rather, they are becoming the supplemental
parent. As Bowlby described in Feeny and Monin
(2008), teachers may be referred to as surrogate
parents.
In addition, Saikia (2017) narrated that after parental
separation, though the damage on the attachment of
the children to their parents may vary from low to
high, it all thins down to the fact that the attachment
already has an impairment. Similar with the theme,
Efforts to Maintain Family Relations, some
adolescents with broken family backgrounds attempt
to maintain contact with their parents, which could be
taxing and uncomfortable (Saika, 2017). To put it
simply, the level of trust and security felt by the
individual to their parents is no longer the same (Feeny
and Monin, 2008). For this reason, they resort to their
teachers as a replacement of their parents (Verchuren
and others, 2012; Riley, 2011).
According to Miller, Esbensen, and Freng (2012), the
definition of what is parent or who is a parent for
adolescents comes to their mind as problems with their
biological father or mother arises. To put it simply, the
Unto et al.
people who the individual consider as a parent is put in
focus (Miller and colleagues, 2012). Similar with the
participants of this study, they may be seeing their
teachers as more of a parent than their actual mother or
fathers. This is reflected in Participant I’s statement,
“Sabi ko nga po, since ‘di ko po nakakausap masyado
si mama, mas lumalapit po ako sa teacher. Dahil po
‘yung teacher ko na ‘yun, tinatanong po niya kung
“May problema ka ba?” or may hinaharap po ako,
ganun. Si mama, di naman po siya ganun.”
Time spent could be considered one factor as to why
the participants have more intimate relationship with
their teachers than their parents (Riley, 2011). The
participants in this study are in high school, and they
spend about six to eight hours of their day at school
(Riley, 2011). Such time spent in the school could
imply that they may have more interaction with their
teachers than their parents (Riley, 2011). Furthermore,
the accessibility of the teachers to the students must be
accounted for in this matter (Riley, 2011). As Miller
and colleagues (2012) discussed, attachment is easily
developed when the parent or the parental figure can
be readily communicated with. It was presented earlier
that one of the difficulties faced by the participants is
their distance from both of their parents. As such could
explain why the participants claim that they are closer
than their teachers, since they spend more time with
their teachers and they are more reachable (Miller and
colleagues, 2012; Riley, 2011).
The previous statements are better explained with
Bowlby’s theory (Riley, 2011). One factor important
to determine one’s attachment to parent is proximity
(Feist and colleagues, 2013). This proximity is attained
easier by individuals with their teacher than their
parents (Riley, 2011). For one, these adolescents spend
most of their time at school, and for another, they are
distant from their parents (Miller and colleagues, 2012;
Riley, 2011). Interestingly, Bowlby in Feeny and
Monin (2008) explained that proximity doesn’t
necessarily have to mean that interaction must exist
between the parent and the child. Even just the regular
presence of the parent is enough to cultivate
attachment with the child (Feeny and Monin, 2008).
As for adolescents with broken families, such
proximity referred to by Bowlby is difficult to attain
(Saikia, 2017)
For the participants to see that their teachers act more
like a parent than their actual mothers or fathers, this
led to another interesting findings in the qualitative
part of the study. In the major theme, Comparing
Roles of Parents, Teachers, and God, it is noteworthy
to emphasize that participants see more similarities
36/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
with their teachers and God, than their parents. Again,
this puts to question as to who the participants
consider as a parent (Riley, 2011). Many studies
already examined relationship parental attachment and
God attachment, but there were almost no studies
examining the relationship of teacher attachment and
God attachment (Cassibba and colleagues, 2013). For
this matter, Miller (2012) and Riley (2011) that it will
be better to examine not whether the parent or teacher
predicts or influences other forms of attachment,
rather, it’s better to examine who the children consider
as their parents. As stated by Bowlby in Granqvist and
colleagues (2014), it’s all about the focus or the core
of one’s attachment. Often times, when the focus of
one’s attachment is detached from the primary
caregiver, it is shifted to other parental figures
(Granqvist and others, 2014). In this case, the focus or
core of attachment of the participants are their
teachers.
In the statements of the participants, the most common
thing they see in their teachers and God is their role as
counselors and a disciplinary guide who teach them
what is right and wrong. As described earlier,
participants open up more to their teachers than to
their parents. The same goes for their relationship with
God, when described Him as a person whom they can
run to in times of trouble. According to Bergin and
Bergin (2009), this is most likely because the internal
working model of participants about their teachers is
that they are counselors. For the same reason, they
projected such model to God (Feney and Moonin,
2008). The fact that the participants considered
themselves having closer relationships with their
teachers and seeing more associations between them
and God, may imply that teachers play a large role in
adolescents’ spirituality (Bergin and Bergin, 2009).
Despite these claims, it is important to take note that
the participants still see a similarity between their God
and their parents. It is interesting to take note that one
participant directly described the connection of his
relationship to his parents and to God. Echoing the
words of Participant I, “Kapag pinaparamdam Niya,
para kasing kapag pinaparamdam na rin ng parents
mo, pinaparamdam na rin ni God.” Participants see
God and their parents as providers, which is common
in most religious cultures (Bosworth, 2015) It must be
taken note that the way God is being a provider is
often associated by most people with parents
(Bosworth, 2015). Echoing how Bosworth (2015)
described it, God is a parent who provides.
In the major theme, Comparing Roles of Parents,
Teachers, and God, the fact that the participants found
Unto et al.
more and warmer associations with their teachers to
God may indicate a warmer relationship with their
teachers. It interesting that these themes show
coherence with results of Harry Harlow’s experiment
on monkeys (Feist and colleagues, 2013). Harlow
discovered that intimacy or comfort are often what
children need more than the needs provided by parents
(Feist and colleagues, 2013).
In the same way, participants also saw a similarity how
teachers and God can help them reconnect with their
parents. Particularly speaking, the participants see
them as a bridge. No wonder, the theme Bridging
Parental Relations through God and Teachers,
emerged as one of the major themes. Participants like
Participant J point out how their teachers and God help
them bridge connections with their parents.
Specifically speaking, participants emphasize that their
teachers encourage them to be closer to their parents
despite the marital separation. Participants also
emphasize how the teachings of God encouraged them
to lessen the negative emotions directed to their
separated parents. On the other hand, it is interesting to
take note that the participants also find their parents
pushing them to be closer to their teachers and God. In
particular, participants point out that their parents
encourage them to establish a good relationship with
their advisers, and to maintain a good level of
spirituality by motivating them to go to church. The
interplay of the support provided by the participants’
parents and parental figures is what Bergin and Bergin
(2009) were trying to explain in their study. Aside
from the internal working model of individuals to
parents (Granqvist and others, 2014), relationships of
adolescents with their parents, teacher, and God, may
affect one another through encouragement (Bergin and
Bergin, 2009). This is important to highlight, as such
encouragement may foster growth in an individual’s
relationship with other parental figures (Bergin and
Bergin, 2009).
The following themes Forming relationship with God
and Parental Duty as Core of Relationships may
explain some disambiguation regarding the researches
about attachment. It was explained by Feeney and
Monin (2008) and Eagan (2004), there are various
claims regarding the level of parental and God
attachment of adolescents with broken families.
Researchers often indicate that adolescents with
broken families often have a low parental attachment,
and therefore a low level of attachment to God
(Cassibba and others, 2013). But as explained by
Kiesling (2011), despite the poor parental attachment
of individuals, they can still make a direct attachment
to God. In fact, God also becomes a supplementary
37/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
parent that replaces the lack of care and security
provided by one’s father or mother (Kiesling, 2011).
To put it simply, it is possible for individuals to make
a warm relationship with God, without being affected
by a prior parental attachment (Kiesling, 2011). Such
is the case of the participants in this study. As
observed in their statements, they narrated a lot of
concepts regarding their perception of God. Most are
positive, and most are not directly linked with their
parents. In fact, the theme about the adolescents’
Forming relationship with God was one of the
prominent themes.
Regarding the theme Parental Duty as Core of
Relationships, it is interesting to take note the
participants still showed some degree of close
relationship with their actual fathers or mothers. The
emergence of this theme is in line with the statements
of Saikia (2017) and Eagan (2004), referring to the
diversity of adolescents in terms of their experience
with parental separation. While most often develops a
poor relationship with their parents after the
separation, there are some who retain a stable and
secure attachment with their fathers or mothers
(Eagan, 2004). The variety in the family set-ups of
adolescents with broken families is one of the
explanations why some researches declare that the
attachment of these adolescents falls in the middle or
average (Eagan, 2004). As Eagan (2004) explained,
there are low and high attachments in these
adolescents, and because of the diversity, their results
often end up in the middle.
Feeney and Monin (2008) backed up the previous
statements by emphasizing the individual differences
of adolescents with broken families. There are many
moderating factors to determine one’s level of
attachment (Feeney and Monin, 2008). Factors may be
internal or external (Feeney and Monin, 2008). For
example, Reinert and Edwards (2014) identified self-
esteem as one of the internal factors that could
moderate parental attachment. Meanwhile, Mukherjee
and Mukherjee (2015) identified gender and age as one
of the internal factors. Eagan (2004) also identified age
as a possible mediator. On the other hand, Saikia
(2017) pointed out that the years since the parents
separated may play a moderating role in the
attachment of such adolescents.
Despite the integrative discussion on the two data
gathered from the quantitative and qualitative methods
of the study, some limitations must be acknowledged
in the study. One limitation is the use of norming to
interpret the results of the participants. The
instruments didn’t provide an interpretation of
Unto et al.
participants test’s score. For this reason, norming was
used with the aid of a statistician to classify the test
scores of the participants as very low, low, average,
high and very high. In addition to this, the participants
of this study are very diverse in terms of their
demographics. As presented, the participants vary in
gender, age, religion, education level, kind of school
they are attending, and years since their parents
separated. These participants also have diverse family
set-ups—wherein some are living only with one
parents and others with step parents. It must also be
taken note that since purposive sampling is used, the
researchers limited the number of participants to 200
and the participants are only within Pampanga.
Another limitation is in line with the demographics.
No mediating factors were considered to examine and
explore the attachment of adolescents with their
parents, teachers, and God. Particularly speaking,
some of the demographics of the participants such as
their age, sex, and years since their parents separated
were not considered, but were pointed to by some
researchers as possible mediators (Saikia, 2017;
Reinert and Edwards, 2014; Eagan, 2004).
Conclusion
Adolescents with broken families have an average
level of parental attachment, teacher attachment, and
God attachment. This is because such adolescents have
diverse experiences and individual differences, thus
they often yield either a low or high score in their
attachment levels, causing them to fall in the middle
range (Eagan, 2004). Parental attachment, teacher
attachment, and God attachment are correlated with
each other, since one’s internalized model of a parental
figure reflects to other parental figures (Grangqvist
and others, 2014; Feeney and Monin, 2008) Parental
attachment influences teacher attachment and God
attachment at some degrees only, since there are
mediating factors that must be considered (Feeney and
Monin, 2008; Eagan, 2004). Adolescents with broken
families have more intimate relationships with their
teachers, since they have greater proximity than the
adolescents’ parents (Granqvist and others, 2014). The
adolescents also see more similarities between their
teachers and God, since their teachers often become
their attachment’s core, in replacement of their
parents’ damaged attachment (Riley, 2011). For the
same reason, they often project their internal working
model of their teachers to God (Feeney and Monin,
2008). Lastly, despite the parental attachment’s
influence on God attachment, participants can still
establish a warm relationship with God without their
prior parental attachment affecting it, since one’s
38/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
attachment to God also acts as replacement to one’s Journal of Early Adolescence, 20(5), 743-766.
damaged parental attachment (Aifuwa, 2016). Dusek, G., & Ayhan A. B. (2014) A Study on Problem Solving
References
Andrews, T. (2012) What is Social Constructionism? Grounded
Theory Review: An International Journal, 11(1).
Baker, J. Grant, s., & Morlock, L. (2008). The teacher–student
relationship as a developmental context for children with
internalizing or externalizing behavior problems. School Psychology
Quarterly, 23(1), 3-15.
Beck, R. & Mcdonald, A. (2004) Attachment to God: The
Attachment to God Inventory, Tests of Working Model
Correspondence, And An Exploration Of Faith Group Differences.
Journal of Psychology and Theology, 32(2), 92-103.
Bergin, C. & Bergin, B. (2009). Attachment in the Classroom. Educ
Psychol Rev, 21, 141-170. DOI 10.1007/s10648-009-9104-0
Bishop, J. (2013) God Distorted: How Your Earthly Father Affects
Your Perception of God and Why It Matters. USA: Multnomah.
Bosworth, D. A. (2015). Ancient Prayers and the Psychology of
Religion: Deities as Parental Figures. Journal of. Biblical Literature
134(4), 84
Bradshaw, M., Ellison, C. G., & Marcum, J. P. (2010). Attachment
to God, Images of God, and Psychological Distress in a Nationwide
Sample of Presbyterians. The International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion, 20(2), 130–147.
Brown, S. (2016) Measures of Shape: Skewness and Kurtosis.
Retrieved from:
https://brownmath.com/stat/shape.htm#SkewnessInterpret
Buyse, E., Verschueren, K., & Doumen, S. (2011). Preschoolers'
attachment to mother and risk for adjustment problems in
kindergarten: can teachers make a difference? Social Development,
12, 33–50.
Cassibba, R., Granqvist, P., & Costantini, A. (2013): Mothers'
attachment security predicts their children's sense of God's
closeness. Attachment & Human Development, 15(1), 51-64.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2013.743253
Chowdhury, A. K. , Debsarkar, A. , & Chakrabarty, S. (2015). Novel
Methods for Assessing Urban Air Quality: Combined Air and Noise
Pollution Approach. Journal of Atmospheric Pollution, 3(1), 1- 8.
Comtois, K. D., Cyr, C., Pascuzzo, K., Lessard, M., & Poulin, C.
(2013). Attachment Theory in Clinical Work with Adolescents.
Journal of Children and Adolescent Behavior, 1, 111.
Dahlberg, L. L., Toal, S. B., Swahn, M. H., & Behrens, C. B. (2005)
Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences
Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools (2nd
Edition). Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
.Davidsen, A. S. (2013) Phenomenological Approaches in
Psychology and Health Sciences. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 10(3), 318-339.
Duchesne, S., Ratelle, C. F., Poitras, S. C., & Drouin, E. (2009).
Early Adolescent Attachment to Parents, Emotional Problems, and
Teacher-Academic Worries About the Middle School Transition.
Unto et al.
Skills of the Children from Broken Family and Full Parents Family
Attending Regional Primary Boarding School. Procedia- Social and
Behavioral Science, 152 (7), 137-142.
Eagan, C. E. (2004) Attachment and Divorce: Family Consequences.
R e t r i e v e d
from:http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/eagan.html
Feeney, B. C. & Monin, J. K. (2008) An attachment-theoretical
perspective on divorce. From Handbook of Attachment, Second
Edition: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications edited by Jude
Cassidy and Phillip R. Shaver. Copyright 2008 by The Guilford
Press.
Feist, J., Feist, G. J., Roberts, T. (2013) Theories of Personality.
Philippines: Mc-Graw Hill.
Field, A.P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: and sex and
drugs and rock ‘n’ roll (3rd edition). London: Sage.
Gaasbeck, V. (n.d.) Presentation of Regression Results. Retrieved
f r o m :
https://www.csus.edu/indiv/v/vangaasbeckk/courses/200a/sup/regres
sionresults.pdf
Gartia, R. (2012) Correlates of Academic Achievement and Family
Environment of Under-graduate Students. Journal of Psychosocial
Research, 7 (1), 139-145.
Granqvist, P., Broberg, A. G., & Hagekull, B. (2014). Attachment,
religiousness, and distress among the religious and spiritual: links
between religious syncretism and compensation. Mental Health,
Religion, and Culture, 17(7), 726-740.
Granqvist, P., Mikulincer, M., Gewirtz, V., & Shaver, P. (2012).
Experimental findings on God as an attachment figure: Normative
processes and moderating effects of internal working models.
Journal or Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 804-818.
Haegerich, T., Oman, R. F., Vesely, S. K., Aspy, C. B., Tolma, E. L.
(2014) The Predictive Influence of Family and Neighborhood Assets
on Fighting and Weapon Carrying from Mid- to Late Adolescence.
Prevention Science, 15, 473-484.
Hussain, S., & Hussain, Y. (2015) Psychological Problems of
Adolescents of Broken and Intact Families in Gilgit: A Comparative
Study. Pakistan Journal of Clinical Psychology, 14 (1), 41-51.
Kiesling, C. (2011). An attachment theory approach to narrating the
faith journey of children of parental divorce. International Journal of
Children's Spirituality, 16, 301–313.
Kimball, C., Boyatzis, C., Cook, K., Leonard, K., & Flanagan, K.
(2013). Attachment to God: A qualitative exploration of emerging
adults’ spiritual relationship with God. Journal of Psychology and
Theology, 41(3), 175-188.
Kirkpatrick, L. (2012). Attachment theory and the evolutionary
psychology of religion. The International Journal for the Psychology
and Religion, 22, 231-241.
Kremer, K. P. (2010) Quality of Teacher-Student Relationships:
Moderator of the Effects of Peer Victimization. An unpublished
dissertation, USA: Arizona State University.
Lang, A. (2013). Impact of attachment to God and religious coping
on life satisfaction. Orvosi Hetilap, 154(46), 1843-1847.
39/40
Psych Educ, 2023, 14: 23-40, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1235, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8383418, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
Limke, A., & Mayfield, P. (2011). Attachment to God:
Differentiating the contributions of fathers and mothers using the
experiences in parental relationships scale. Journal of Psychology
and Theology, 39:2, 122-129.
Magpantay, M.J., Malabrigo, P., Malijan, R.J., Manarin, M.G.
(2014) Behavioral Problems and Coping Strategies of Selected
Adolescents Belonging to a Broken Family. CAM Research Journal,
2 (1).
Maguire, M. & Delahunt, B. (2017) Doing a Thematic Analysis: A
Practical, Step-by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars.
All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education,
3.
Miller, M. H., Esbensen, F. A., & Freng, A. (2012). Parental
attachment, parental supervisionand adolescent deviance in intact
and non-intact families. Journal of Crime and Justice, 22, 1999 (2),
1-29.
Miner, M. (2009). The Impact of Child-parent Attachment,
Attachment to God and Religious Orientation on Psychological
Adjustment. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 37(2), 114-124.
Moga, M. J. (2013) The Mysterious Human Self. Philippines: St.
Paul’s.
Monteiro L., Veríssimo M., Vaughn B., Santos A. J., Torres N.,
Fernandes M. (2010). The organization of children's secure base
behaviour in two parent Portuguese families and Father's
participation in child related activities. European Journal of
Development, 7, 545–560.
Mukherjee P., & Mukherjee, H. (2015) Presence of both the parents
in determining child’s well-being. International Journal of Health
and Well-Being, 6 (10), 990-993.
Murray, C. (2009). Parent and Teacher Relationships as Predictors
of School Engagement and Functioning Among Low-Income Urban
Youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(3), 376- 404.
Rathus, S. (2013) Psychology. Philippines: Cengage Learning.
Reinert, D. F. & Edwards, C. E. (2014). Attachment Theory and
Concepts of God: Parent Referencing Versus Self-Referencing.
SAGE PUB, 1-9. DOI: 10.1177/2158244014560547
Riley P. (2011). Attachment Theory and the Teacher-Student
Relationship: A Practical Guide for Teachers, Teacher Educators
and School Leaders. Abingdon: Routledge.
Sabol, T. J., & Pianta, R. (2012). Recent trends in research on
teacher-child relationships. Attachment and Human Development,
14, 213–231.
Saikia, R. (2017) Broken Family: Its causes and effect on the
development of children. International Journal of Applied Research,
3 (2).
Sierra, P. G. (2012). Attachment and preschool teacher: an
opportunity to develop a secure base. International Journal of Early
Childhood and Special Education, 4, 1–16.
Sim, T. N. & Yow, S. A. (2010). God Attachment, Mother
Attachment, and Father Attachment in Early and Middle
Adolescence. Journal of religion and health. 50. 264-78.
10.1007/s10943-010-9342-y.
Sinnott, J. D. (2010). Coherent themes: Individuals' relationships
with god, their early childhood experiences, their bonds with
Unto et al.
significant others, and their relational delusions during psychotic
episodes all have similar holistic, existential, and relational themes.
Journal of Adult Development, 17(4), 230–244.
Stanford, P. (2010) 50 ideas you really need to know religion.
China: Quercus Publishing Plc.
Veríssimo, M., Torres, N., Silva, F., Fernandes, C., Vaughn, B. E.,
& Santos, A. J. (2017). Children's Representations of Attachment
and Positive Teacher-Child Relationships. Frontiers in Psychology,
8, 2270.
Verschueren K., Doumen S., Buyse E. (2012). Relationships with
mother, teacher and peers: unique and joint effects on young
children's self-concept. Attachment and Human Development, 14,
233–248.
Verschueren, K. & Koomen, H. M.Y. (2012). Teacher-child
relationships from an attachment perspective. Attachment and
Human Development, 14(3), 205-11.
Williams, L. H. (2013) Attachment to God: Exploring its Impact on
the Teaching and Learning Orientations of Christian Adult
Educators. An unpublished dissertation, Alabama: Auburn
University.
Young, R. E. (2013). The Influence of Parent-Child Attachment
Relationships and Self-Esteem on Adolescents' Engagement in
Risky Behaviors. An unpublished dissertation. Boston,
Massachusetts: Brandeis University
Zeratsion, H., Dalsklev, M., Bjertness, E., Lien, L., Haavet, O. R.,
Halvorsen, J. A., Claussen, B. (2013). Parental divorce in late
adolescence does not seem to increase mental health problems: A
population study from norway. BMC Public Health, 13, (413).
Zhai, H., Bai, B., Chen, L., Han, D., Wang, L., Qiao, Z., Yang, Y.
(2015). Correlation between Family Environment and Suicidal
Ideation in University Students in China. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(2), 1412–1424.
Affiliations and Corresponding Information
Christian Khiel P. Unto
Holy Angel University, Philippines
Patricia Anne Sotto
Holy Angel University, Philippines
Laurence Arvin Quintos
Holy Angel University, Philippines
Jannah Janelle Sangalang
Holy Angel University, Philippines
Elvira David
Holy Angel University, Philippines
40/40