Sentences with phrase «insecure attachment compared»

Even though singles show a higher probability for insecure attachment compared to coupled individuals, inconsistencies have been published for the second classification (anxious versus avoidant).

The odds of individuals with CD / ODD having an insecure attachment compared to individuals without CD / ODD was odds ratio (OR) = 3.01, 95 % CI = 1.85 — 4.88, p < 0.001, k = 6.

Not exact matches

Number 19 «Insecure attachment and real vs. perceived threat in relationships» Dr. Geoff MacDonald at the University of Toronto discusses how insecurely attached individuals, compared to the securely attached, perceive potential close relationships as socially threatening vs. rewarding.

Comparing 57 MZ and 81 DZ twin pairs, Bokhorst and colleagues [78] found only unique environmental factors accounting for the variance in disorganised vs. organised attachment, while both shared and non-shared environmental effects accounted for the variance in secure vs. insecure attachment.

They found that insecure attachment was overrepresented in the clinical group compared to the non-clinical group.

One thing that researchers found was that when compared with the other two attachment categories (the insecure ones), children with disorganized attachment concerns are at more risk of developing aggressive behavior problems, which might already surface at the age of about five.

Young adults with insecure attachment orientations report lower levels of extraversion and openness with others compared to those with secure attachments.

Research show that securely attached individuals tend to experience high quality and highly rewarding social lives compared to those with insecure attachments (Anders & Tucker, 2000; Gillath, Johnson, Selcuk, & Teel, 2011).

Seven studies on attachment security / disorganization and child maltreatment in families have been reported, and six studies on attachment in institution - reared children using the (modified) Strange Situation procedure to assess attachment.8 In order to examine the impact of child maltreatment on attachment we compare the studies» combined distribution of attachment patterns to the normative low - risk distribution of attachment (N = 2104, derived from the meta - analysis of Van IJzendoorn, Schuengel, & Bakermans - Kranenburg9): insecure - avoidant (A): 15 %, secure (B): 62 %, insecure - resistant (C): 9 %, and disorganized (D): 15 %.

In one investigation of more than 700 Israeli infants, Sagi and associates20 found that «center - care, in and of itself, adversely increased the likelihood of infants developing insecure attachment to their mothers as compared with infants who were either in maternal care, individual nonparental care with a relative, individual nonparental care with a paid caregiver, or family day - care.»

Additional findings indicated that married women in the study had a lower level of insecure adult attachment, particularly, anxious attachment, compared to single women.

The aim was to test these relatively new measures in practice contexts administered by practitioners, and to determine rates of insecure and disorganised attachment style to compare with other studies.

However, a difference was found in verbal ability of children with secure, compared to children with insecure, attachment classification with respect to mother (F (1, 115) = 6.40, p <.05, η 2 =.001), and insecurely attached children scored significantly lower than securely attached (Secure: M = 92.33, SD = 1.62; Insecure: M = 84.23, SD = 2.76), logistic regression B = − 1.01, pinsecure, attachment classification with respect to mother (F (1, 115) = 6.40, p <.05, η 2 =.001), and insecurely attached children scored significantly lower than securely attached (Secure: M = 92.33, SD = 1.62; Insecure: M = 84.23, SD = 2.76), logistic regression B = − 1.01, pInsecure: M = 84.23, SD = 2.76), logistic regression B = − 1.01, p <.0001.