Shape step one. High Gender X Attachment classification (AAI) regarding Rejecting and Forgetting caregiving (probable decisions bills), and Outrage for the co-moms and dad (spirits measure), coded about P-CAI interviews.
Contour 1. Tall Gender X Connection category (AAI) regarding Rejecting and you may Neglecting caregiving (possible decisions balances), and Fury for the co-father or mother (state of mind size), coded throughout the P-CAI interview.
Univariate aftereffects of AAI category, and you can subsequent article-hoc reviews, try exhibited within the Dining table 4. Once the hypothesized (H2), there clearly was much more idealization and you may derogation of one’s link to the kid certainly moms and dads categorized while the Dismissive in terms of attachment (AAI/D), and you can much more outrage to your the kid and anger on this new co-parent one of mothers categorized since the Obsessed (AAI/E). As the hypothesized (H3), adult guilt try high one of parents classified given that Preoccupied with respect in order to attachment (AAI/E) in addition to large having mothers dismissive in terms of attachment (AAI/Ds), than the autonomous (AAI/F) mothers. And verifying all of our theory (H4), preoccupying thinking of being refuted of naughtydate login the child was in fact higher among mothers whoever newest accessory representations had been categorized as the Dismissive (AAI/Ds).
Typed online:
Desk 4. Variations in parents’ preoccupying thinking out of getting rejected, rage, parental shame, and you may idealization, depending on their AAI-class (N = 77).
To address hypothesis 5 concerning differences between mothers’ and dads’ probable caregiving behaviors as revealed in their caregiving representations, MANOVA was carried out with P-CAI probable parenting behaviors loving, rejecting, neglecting and involving (role-reversing) as dependent variables, parent gender (father vs. mother) and parent AAI-classification (Dismissive vs. Preoccupied vs. Autonomous) as grouping variables. Also here, co-parent attachment scriptedness (ASA) was entered as covariate. Besides the expected main multivariate effect of AAI classification (Wilks’?, F(8, 134) = 7.72, p < .0001, ? 2 = .316) on caregiving behaviors, the analysis did reveal a multivariate effect of parent gender (Wilks'?, F(4, 67) = 3.26, p = .017, ? 2 = .163), and also a multivariate gender X AAI-classification interaction effect (Wilks’?, F(8, 134) = 2.57, p = .012, ? 2 = .133). The univariate tests uncovered that both these effects concerned differences, between fathers and mothers, in probable parental rejecting behavior (Mfathers = 2.42, SD = 1.92, Mmothers = 1.74, SD = 1.28). Among parents with Dismissive (AAI/Ds) current attachment representations, there were more rejecting (Figure 1(b)) and more neglecting (Figure 1(c)) behaviors described by fathers in the P-CAI interview, compared to mothers. The multivariate effect of co-parent attachment scriptedness (ASA) was also significant (Wilks’?, F(cuatro, 67) = 4.03, p = .006, ? 2 = .194). Subsequent univariate analysis revealed effects on probable loving (F(step 1, 70) = , p < .0001, ? 2 = .186) and rejecting (F(1, 70) = 6.12, p = .015, ? 2 = .080), but not on neglecting and involving behaviors. Thus, elaborate and readily available attachment scripts in the co-parent are associated with more evidence of probable loving and less evidence of probable rejecting caregiving behaviors in the interviewed fathers’ and mothers’ caregiving representations.
Table 5 gift suggestions a list of part of the results of mother intercourse and you can parent accessory group, respectively, and you can interactions among them, including aftereffects of co-mother accessory scriptedness, throughout the over analyses.
Published on the web:
In a final, exploratory round, and drawing upon the finding that probable experiences of a rejecting father were negatively associated to parents’ chances of receiving an Autonomous classification with respect to their own caregiving representations (P-CAI/F), the possibility of differences in mothers’ and fathers’ childhood experiences of rejection by their fathers was tested. ANOVA with parent gender (male vs. female) and P-CAI classification (Autonomous vs. Dismissive vs. Preoccupied) as grouping variables, and the AAI subscale coding probable rejection by the father as dependent variable was carried out. In addition to a main effect of parent gender (F(step 1, 70) = 8.81, p < .005, ? 2 = .11) indicating that, compared to mothers, fathers' adult attachment representations (AAI) included significantly higher amounts of rejection by their own fathers (Mfather = 3.57, SD = 2.29; Mmother = 2.61, SD = 1.89), the analysis revealed a tendency of a P-CAI classification X gender interaction (F(dos, 70) = 2.92, p < .06, ? 2 = .09). Among parents whose caregiving representations were classified as Dismissive or Preoccupied with respect to parental caregiving, fathers reported childhood experiences of rejection by their fathers to a larger extent than mothers did (Figure 1(d)).
