ReviewNew directions for child and adolescent development2021
The limits of the attachment network.
Review in New directions for child and adolescent development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Learning Theory Approach to Attachment Theory: Exploring Clinical Applications.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2022Review
- The limits of the attachment network.New directions for child and adolescent development · 2021Review
- Grandmothers are part of the parenting network, too! A longitudinal study on coparenting, maternal sensitivity, child attachment and behavior problems in a Chinese sample.New directions for child and adolescent development · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
From the beginning, theories of attachment and caregiving have given rise to questions about minimum and maximum numbers of attachment figures. The child's tendency to direct attachment behavior to a specific figure rather than to whoever is nearby has led to the idea of monotropy, suggesting that a child would thrive best with one special attachment figure. From an evolutionary perspective kinship caregiving networks are more plausible as they would increase the chances of survival, and in hunter-gatherer and agricultural communities paternal care and kinship networks providing care for young children were indeed common. A recent development in cultural evolution is the invention of organized day care and children's homes and institutions. Although the attachment network may increase in size with the child's cognitive development, research on institutionalized care demonstrates that high numbers of caregivers preclude secure attachments. The limiting factor to attachment networks may however not be the number of caregivers, but the opportunities for the child to learn contingencies in social relationships that have an attachment component.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.