Procedures
To greatest address any possible biases because of attrition during the longitudinal analyses, full imputation limit chances (FIML) measures were used that have analyses, along with every parameters which were about future lost investigation (i.e., in which study weren’t shed totally randomly). Because these procedures have been discovered so you’re able to produce minimum of biased estimates whenever all available investigation can be used for longitudinal analyses (compared to. listwise deletion of forgotten studies), the entire brand-new test of 185 to your big research try used in such analyses. That it huge decide to try hence rendez-vous athée provides the absolute best rates out of gains and alter inside externalizing choices and you can depressive symptoms and you will was minimum likely to be biased by shed research. elizabeth., listwise removal) produced abilities that have been dramatically same as people said below. For the contribution, analyses advise that attrition is smaller complete and not likely to possess altered any of the conclusions said. Analyses together with revealed that users having whom interaction study having dads was in fact available got highest loved ones income, was indeed less likely to become members of a racial/cultural fraction class, and you will have been likely to be properly affixed than professionals getting which dad communication data just weren’t offered.
Adult attachment interview (AAI) and you can Q-set (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1996; Kobak ainsi que al., 1993)
So it arranged interviews probes individuals’ descriptions of their youthfulness dating having moms and dads in both conceptual terminology along with requests specific supporting memories. Such, subjects have been questioned so you’re able to checklist five words explaining the very early teens relationships with every parent immediately after which to explain certain periods one to shown those terminology. Most other inquiries centered upon particular instances of upset, breakup, loss, traumatization, and getting rejected. Fundamentally, brand new interviewer requested members to incorporate more integrative meanings away from alter for the matchmaking with moms and dads therefore the ongoing state of them relationship. The fresh interview contains 18 inquiries and you can live an hour or so towards average. Limited adaptations towards the adult type have been made to really make the inquiries more natural and simply knew for a teenager people (Ward & Carlson, 1995). Interviews was indeed audiotaped and you will transcribed to own programming.
This new AAI Q-place (Kobak ainsi que al., 1993) was designed to closely synchronous the fresh Adult Attachment Interviews Group Program (Chief & Goldwyn, 1998) however, so you’re able to yield carried on procedures off attributes out-of accessory organization. Per rater discover a good transcript and you can given good Q-kinds breakdown by assigning 100 affairs for the 9 groups ranging from most to help you least trait of interviews, playing with a required delivery. The interviews was basically thoughtlessly ranked of the at least several raters that have comprehensive trained in the Q-sort and also the Mature Accessory Interview Category Program.
These Q-sorts were then compared with a dimensional prototype sort for secure versus anxious interview strategies, reflecting the overall degree of coherence of discourse, the integration of episodic and semantic attachment memories, and a clear objective valuing of attachment. The individual correlation of the 100 items of an individual’s Q-sort with a prototype sort for a maximally secure transcript was then used as that participant’s scale security score (ranging from ?1.00 to 1.00). The Spearman-Brown interrater reliability for the final security scale score was.82. This system was designed to yield continuous measures of qualities of attachment organization rather than to replicate classifications from the Main and Goldwyn (1998) system. Prior work has compared the scores obtained within this lab to a subsample (N = 76) of adolescent AAIs that were classified by an independent coder with well-established reliability in classifying AAIs (U. Wartner) We did this by converting the Q-sort scales described above into classifications using an algorithm described by Kobak et al. (1993). Using this approach, we obtained an 84% match for security versus insecurity between the Q-sort method and the classification method (K = .68). Prior research in adolescent samples has also indicated that security is highly stable over a two-year period (i.e., r = .61) (Allen, McElhaney, Kuperminc, & Jodl, 2004). We also considered employing a category available for coding adolescents’ use of hyperactivating versus deactivating strategies in the interview, but given that its high inverse correlation with attachment security (r = .78, p < .0001) suggested it would be supplying largely redundant information, it was not analyzed further.