Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42189897›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Organizing adult attachment in alternative ways: A qualitative assessment of schemas antithetical to the secure base script.

Shannon Maingot, Marije L Verhage, Carlo Schuengel, Theodore E A Waters, Elja E J Meijer, Gabrielle Myre, Eva C van Meeuwen, Glenn I Roisman, Robbie Duschinsky, Marissa D Nivison and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Shannon MaingotDepartment of Clinical Child and Family Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9372-6497
Marije L VerhageDepartment of Clinical Child and Family Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Carlo SchuengelDepartment of Clinical Child and Family Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Theodore E A WatersDepartment of Psychology, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Elja E J MeijerDepartment of Clinical Child and Family Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8685-3244
Gabrielle MyreDepartment of Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Eva C van MeeuwenDepartment of Clinical Child and Family Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Glenn I RoismanInstitute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Robbie DuschinskyDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Marissa D NivisonDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9436-722X
Or DaganDepartment of Psychology, Long Island University-Post, Brookville, New York, United States of America.
Victoria ZhuDepartment of Psychology, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Marinus van IJzendoornResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Marian J Bakermans-KranenburgFacultad de Psicología y Humanidades, Universidad San Sebastián, Sede Valdivia, Chile.
Sheri MadiganDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7536-3258
Chantal CyrDepartment of Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Kazuko Y BehrensDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, State University of New York Polytechnic Institute, Utica, New York, United States of America.
Maria S WongSchool of Social Sciences, Communication and Humanities, Endicott College, Beverly, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Elizabeth MeinsDepartment of Psychology, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Attachment Secondary Processing and Analysis Network of the Collaboration on Attachment Transmission Synthesis (ASPAN-CATS)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How adults make meaning of their childhood experiences with caregivers plays a central role in how they anticipate support, manage distress, and interpret relationships. To understand how adults conceptualize these attachment relationships, the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) probes for childhood memories of general relationships, day-to-day interactions, and instances of loss, threat, and separation. Across these narratives, the AAI captures expectations of whether caregivers are perceived as an available source of support in times of distress, and whether they serve as a secure base from which to seek comfort and explore the world. Developing a coding system for secure base script knowledge, based on the AAI (AAIsbs), Waters, and Facompré also identified alternative, schema-like representations that seemed to conflict with the secure base script. Before exploring empirical questions regarding these alternative schemas, the present study undertook a qualitative systematic examination of their content in a large, risk-diverse corpus of interviews from 14 studies. Conducting a thematic analysis, 1,592 AAIs were examined by seven trained coders. This resulted in the identification of three novel themes (Favoritism, Incompetent, and Restrictive), the amendment of three existing schemas (Caregiver Source of Distress, Harsh and Threatening Parenting, and Self-Involved), and the replication of evidence for existing schemas. Together, the diversity and thematic coherence of alternative schemas underscore how relational expectations may be organized around vigilance, distress, or self-reliance, rather than comfort and support. This study contributes to theory-building on relational representations by expanding our understanding of how caregiving relationships are cognitively structured under conditions of relational adversity.

Indexed as

CaregiversObject AttachmentAdultFemaleHumansInterpersonal RelationsMale

Identifiers

PMID42189897
PMCPMC13210227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.