Attachment and children's biased attentional processing: Evidence for the exclusion of attachment-related information

33Citations
Citations of this article
115Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Research in both infants and adults demonstrated that attachment expectations are associated with the attentional processing of attachment-related information. However, this research suffered from methodological issues and has not been validated across ages. Employing a more ecologically valid paradigm to measure attentional processes by virtue of eye tracking, the current study tested the defensive exclusion hypothesis in late childhood. According to this hypothesis, insecurely attached children are assumed to defensively exclude attachment-related information. We hypothesized that securely attached children process attachment- related neutral and emotional information in a more open manner compared to insecurely attached children. Sixty-two children (59.7% girls, 8-12 years) completed two different tasks, while eye movements were recorded: task one presented an array of neutral faces including mother and unfamiliar women and task two presented the same with happy and angry faces. Results indicated that more securely attached children looked longer at mother's face regardless of the emotional expression. Also, they tend to have more maintained attention to mother's neutral face. Furthermore, more attachment avoidance was related to a reduced total viewing time of mother's neutral, happy, and angry face. Attachment anxiety was not consistently related to the processing of mother's face. Findings support the theoretical assumption that securely attached children have an open manner of processing all attachment-related information. © 2014 Vandevivere et al.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vandevivere, E., Braet, C., Bosmans, G., Mueller, S. C., & De Raedt, R. (2014). Attachment and children’s biased attentional processing: Evidence for the exclusion of attachment-related information. PLoS ONE, 9(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103476

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free