1 / 53

“ The Past Was Close Behind” Developmental Forerunners of Couple Interactions

“ The Past Was Close Behind” Developmental Forerunners of Couple Interactions. W. Andrew Collins University of Minnesota wcollins@umn.edu Collaborators: Katherine Haydon, Minda Oriña, Jessica Salvatore, Jeffry Simpson, SiSi Tran.

marvela
Télécharger la présentation

“ The Past Was Close Behind” Developmental Forerunners of Couple Interactions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “The Past Was Close Behind” Developmental Forerunners of Couple Interactions W. Andrew Collins University of Minnesota wcollins@umn.edu Collaborators: Katherine Haydon, Minda Oriña, Jessica Salvatore, Jeffry Simpson, SiSi Tran

  2. Overview • The long arm of childhood relationships • A research approach:Longitudinal-developmental research from birth to age 32 • Two multi-method analyses of relationship history and functioning in couples • Implications and possible health-related directions

  3. Attachment as a Frame • Species-typical behaviors evolved through natural selection • Implicates hormones and peptides associated with lactation and regulation of pain and stress • Mutually regulated dyadic systems • From birth forward, experiences in successive life periods form and modify relationship-relevant behaviors, emotions, and cognitions • Relationship functioning is always a function of history and current circumstances “Bonding patterns established in infancy may also carry over or become re-established in adult relationships and emerge as emotional reactions to relationship challenges or loss.” Planalp, Fitness, & Fehr (2006), p. 380

  4. Secure Attachment Promotes Relationship Development • Confidence to explore novel/challenging (social) situations • Empathy, social skills • Positive expectations about others’ responsiveness • Regulation of emotions • Stage-setting: peer relationships elaborate and expand on these abilities

  5. Links from infant to adult attachment • 64%-77% concordance between infant and adult attachment classifications in the U. S. (same person) • Maternal AAI scores predicted their infants’ attachment 75% of the time • Concordance across three generations (grandmother, mother, infant)

  6. Security of attachment in infancy related to later relationships • Effective peer relationships in school Early insecurity predicts more competitive and aggressive interactions in preschool • Adult romantic relationships e.g., early insecuritygreater hostility to partner at 20-21

  7. Byron Egeland Alan Sroufe

  8. Byron Egeland Alan Sroufe

  9. Minnesota Longitudinal Study of Risk and Adaptation Key Question: What processes account for continuity and change in adaptation from birth to maturity? Three aspects of adaptation: • Normative social development • Educational achievement, functioning • Psychopathology

  10. Longitudinal-Developmental Perspective • Focus on the main challenges facing individuals in each life period • Continuity and change • Essential environmental supports • Near- and long-term consequences of difficulties, environmental deficits

  11. MLS/PC: Participants 265 primiparous mothers in third trimester of pregnancy • Mother’s ages at delivery: 12-34 years (M=20.60; SD=3.57) • 83% Caucasian, 12% African-American • 58% single • 59% HS graduates • IQ test scores: 49-142 (M=105.30, SD=15.13) • Occupations: clerical & service workers; laborers; professional/administrative; students; 15% unemployed

  12. Today . . . • 180 participants • Half stable, economically independent • 51% with relatively stable relationships rated as high quality, growth-enhancing • 9.6% are college graduates; 19% in school at least part time • 75% working; majority express job satisfaction

  13. Frequent, detailed assessments All participants studied at: • Birth, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 30, 42, 48, 54, 64 months • Kindergarten, grades 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 • Ages 16, 17½, 19, 23, 26, 28 Subsamples: • Nursery school (age 4) • Summer camps (ages 10-11) • Weekend retreat (age 15) • Romantic partners/couples (ages 20-21, 26-27)

  14. Multiple independent measures Multiple settings • Laboratories • Homes • Schools • Camps Multiple Data Sources • Observer data • Ratings (teachers, counselors, parents) • Test data • Self-report data (caregivers, participants) • School, public records

  15. Developmentally Keyed Measurement

  16. Romantic Relationship Assessments:Interviews of all participants (16, 19, 23, 26) • Dating history • Activities with, & feelings about, partner - “…time when you felt especially close…” - “…biggest fight or argument in the past month…” Coder ratings on 5-point scales of overall quality • High=mutual caring, trust, support, emotional closeness • Low=bland, empty; hurtful to one or both parties; role rigidity, chronic intense conflict, victimization • Intraclass r’s=.85-.93

  17. Romantic Relationship Assessments: Effectiveness of Involvement in Relationships (23) • Interview about dating history and current relationship • Coded for all participants • High =formed & maintained positive relationship(s) OR left negative ones • Low =no relationships or stayed in negative ones • Intraclass r = .94

  18. Romantic Relationship Assessments:Couples Procedure (20-21 & 27) • Interviews with partners separately • Observations of collaborative problem-solving • Coder ratings of: • Overall quality of relationship • Hostility, anger, positive/negative emotion, etc., in interactions • Intraclass r’s= .82-.96

  19. What is the role of relationship history? • Caregiving composite (ages 12-42 months) • Peer competence (teacher ratings) (preschool, grades 1-3, 6) • Parent-child collaboration, emotional support, and effectiveness of conflict resolution (age 13) • Friendship security ratings (age 16)

  20. Some Key Findings Quality of romantic relationships in early Adulthood (ages 21-22) significantly related to relationship experiences from birth forward. • Relationship history from birth through middle adolescence significantly related to indicators of harmony and flexible functioning (e.g., effective conflict resolution, shared positive affect) at 21-22 and 26.

  21. Relationship status, activity Infancy: none Emotional support, conflict resolution in families (13) Peer competence (grade 6) Friendship competence (16) Relationship Quality Infancy: responsive care Emotional support, conflict resolution in families (13) Peer competence (grades 1-3) Friendship competence (16) Developmental coherence: Romantic and earlier relationships Collins & Madsen, 2002

  22. Some Key Findings Quality of romantic relationships in early adulthood (ages 21-22) significantly related to relationship experiences from birth forward. • Relationship history from birth through middle adolescence significantly related to indicators of harmony and flexible functioning (e.g., effective conflict resolution, shared positive affect) at 21-22 and 26. • Profile of general peer competence in childhood and adolescence predicts relationship status (age 23), but not quality. Friendship quality profiles predict quality (ages 21-22), but not status.

  23. Infancy/ Early Middle Early Later Early Todder Childhood Childhood Adolescence Adolescence Adult 12-24 mos 4-5 yrs 8 yrs 12 yrs 16 yrs Age 23 Represen- tation Represen- tation Represen- tation Represen- tation Early Relationship Quality Relationship Competence Social Experience Social Experience Social Experience Social Experience

  24. Should we expect the long arm of developmental history to reach into adult partnerships? In what ways?

  25. Case #1: Forerunners of Differential Emotional Experiences

  26. Emotional Experience in Relationships: Attachment Perspectives • Early attachment experiences uniquely tied to the experience and expression of emotions in relationships • Individuals with relatively more secure attachment histories experience and/or express more positive and less negative emotions in their relationships

  27. Adult Couple Relationships Emotional Tone Index (ETI) (age 20-23): • The extent of positive emotions • The extent of negative emotions • The balance of emotions (positive emotions – negative emotions)

  28. Observations of Couple Interactions At age 20-23, each couple engaged in a video- taped conflict resolution and Ideal Couple Q-sort task (30 mins). Ratings composited to create scores for each couple’s: • Positive relationship process (positive affect, secure base behavior, quality of conflict resolution, quality of interaction) • Negative relationship process (negative affect, anger, hostility).

  29. Predictions • Link between regulation of emotions when distressed in the Strange Situation (at 12 months) and experiencing/expressing emotions in adult relationships (at 20-23). • Link should be mediated through functioning in 2 critical arenas : • Social competence in elementary school, • Security with friends in high school.

  30. Assessments before Adulthood Recall: • Early Attachment:Strange Situation at 12 months. • Social Competence (grades 1-3): Teacher rank-ordering of all children in classroom. • Friendship Security (age 16): Raters scored the extent to which participants claimed they could “be themselves” in their friendships, expected friends to be available and supportive, and shared positive and negative personal experiences with friends.

  31. Attachment History and Emotional Experience .38** Peer Competence FriendshipSecurity .36** .27* .20+ InfantAttachment Adult ETI (balance) CFI=1.0, RMSEA=0.00, X2 (2)=.20, ns + p < .10; * p < .05; ** p < .01

  32. Attachment History and Emotional Experience .38** Peer Competence FriendshipSecurity .36** .41** .05 InfantAttachment Adult Positive Process CFI=1.0, RMSEA=0.00, X2 (2)=.24, ns ** p < .01

  33. Attachment History and Emotional Experience .38** Peer Competence FriendshipSecurity .36** -.35** -.09 InfantAttachment Adult Negative Process CFI=1.0, RMSEA=0.00, X2 (2)=1.19, ns ** p < .01

  34. Attachment History and Emotional Experience .38** Peer Competence FriendshipSecurity .36** .43** .20+ InfantAttachment Adult Composite Index CFI=1.0, RMSEA=0.00, X2 (2)=1.19, ns + p < .10; ** p < .01

  35. And so . . . • Self-reported emotional experience of both partners and the characteristic couple interaction patterns reflect the history of age-salient relationships from birth through adolescence. • Relationships after infancy contribute significantly, over and above the direct connection from infant to adult relationship.

  36. Case #2: Developmental Roots of Conflict Resolution Patterns

  37. Effectiveness of Conflict Resolution: Observational Coding • Assesses couple’s ability to make decisions or resolve conflicts in a manner that leads to mutual satisfaction with the outcome; e.g., • Discuss each side openly, listen to each other’s perspective, accommodate both views in resolution • Work cooperatively, rather than being dominated by one partner • High = Both partners appear satisfied with the process; resolution process occasions little strain, obvious effort • Low = One partner appears manifests dissatisfaction either actively or passively • High agreement between coders (ri = .96)

  38. Partners’ Conflict Resolution Strategies

  39. Conflict Strategy Scales • Dyadic, holistic • 5-point scales 1 = strategy never used 5 = only strategy observed • Intercoder reliabilities = .72 - .97

  40. Question 1: How frequently was each of the strategies used?

  41. None MA CC MA and CC MA and DC MA and DW 12% DW and CC DW, CC, MA 31% Other 8% 6% 5% 6% 12% 8% 13% Question 1: What % is each strategy of total strategies used?

  42. Question 2: How important is each strategy to overall conflict resolution effectiveness? Increase in effect size (R2) • Demand-Comply .04 • Demand-Withdraw .04 to .14** • Mutual Avoidance .14 to .24** • Cross-Complaint .24 to .43**

  43. Question 3: Prediction from early relationships + current strategies • Does combination of early relationship experiences and current resolution strategies predict couple rating of resolution effectiveness better than either alone? • Answer: Yes • Effect size (R2) for current behavior + developmental predictors = .55

  44. Some Lessons So Far • Early relationship history provides useful information about both the “insider” perspective and “outsider” perspectives on key experiences and behaviors of established couples. • Process of developmental influence is on-going and represents the result of both history and current circumstances. • Continuing goal: What can we learn about marital stability, satisfaction, and effective functioning from attending to the interplay of history and current circumstances?

  45. It takes two.I thought one was enough,It's not true:It takes two of usYou came throughWhen the journey was rough.It took you.It took two of us. It takes oneTo begin, but then onceYou've begun,It takes two of you. Lyrics from “It Takes Two” by Stephen Sondheim

  46. Special Thanks To Byron Egeland Alan Sroufe Michelle Englund Elizabeth Carlson Michelle Englund National Institute of Mental Health National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

  47. Relationship Processes and Health: Some Working Assumptions • Relationships, both historically and currently, are integral to emotion regulation and, in turn, to competence in key adult roles (e.g., parenting, work) and to the balance among roles. • Stress and morbidity are related to particulars of social roles. • Well being likely mediates between relationship functioning and physical health.

  48. A Five-Feature Framework • Involvement(How much? When? To what degree?) • Partner selection(With whom?) • Content(Doing what?) • Quality(How? In what manner?) • Cognitive and emotional processes(With what thoughts, feelings?)

  49. An Autobiographical Lyric “I had a job in the great north woods Working as a cook for a spell But I never did like it all that much And one day the ax just fell So I drifted down to New Orleans Where I happened to be employed Workin’ for a while on a fishin’ boat Right outside Delacroix But all the while I was alone The past was close behind I seen a lot of women But she never escaped my mind, and I just grew Tangled up in blue” Tangled Up in Blue from Blood on the Tracks, 1975

More Related