supportiveness was linked to attachment security (Allen et al., 2003; Allen et al., 2004). Ratings of parental acceptance may also reflect whether the teen currently sees their parent as a secure base. Similarly, adolescents who engaged with parents when asking for advice also experienced relative increases in attachment security over time. Engagement reflected the teen’s valuing of parental advice and also how likely the teen thought their parent would be able to assuage the problem. It is also a reflection of how committed the teen was to continuing the conversation and to contributing to the relationship in general. Theoretically, when an adolescent engages when seeking advice from a parent (an attachment-activated process), this reflects the ability to effectively use the parent as a secure base. Youths who took a more assertive role in directing an advice task with parents also experienced relative increases in attachment security over time. These teens were comfortable verbally directing the conversation in order to get help in a supportive behavior task. Teens that are confident for support in relationships may then be better able to support in asking receive these relationships, which can lead to more secure models of attachment over time. Contrary to our expectations, behaviors promoting and inhibiting autonomy and youths’ relatedness on a disagreement task with parents did not predict relative change in attachment security over time, although it was correlated with security at both times and predicted security at age 24. This suggests that autonomy and relatedness may be better markers of security (perhaps even as effects of security) rather than predictors of future changes in security. It may be prior that the ability to express self autonomously within parental relationships and to maintain one’s relatedness during disagreements grows from a secure attachment to the parent; in other words, it may be an effect rather than a cause.
supportiveness was linked to attachment security (Allen et al., 2003; Allen et al., 2004). Ratings of parental acceptance may also reflect whether the teen currently sees their parent as a secure base. Similarly, adolescents who engaged with parents when asking for advice also experienced relative increases in attachment security over time. Engagement reflected the teen’s valuing of parental advice and also how likely the teen thought their parent would be able to assuage the problem. It is also a reflection of how committed the teen was to continuing the conversation and to contributing to the relationship in general. Theoretically, when an adolescent engages when seeking advice from a parent (an attachment-activated process), this reflects the ability to effectively use the parent as a secure base. Youths who took a more assertive role in directing an advice task with parents also experienced relative increases in attachment security over time. These teens were comfortable verbally directing the conversation in order to get help in a supportive behavior task. Teens that are confident asking for support in relationships may then be better able to receive support in these relationships, which can lead to more secure models of attachment over time. Contrary to our expectations, youths’ behaviors promoting and inhibiting autonomy and relatedness on a disagreement task with parents did not predict relative change in attachment security over time, although it was correlated with security at both times and predicted security at age 24. This suggests that autonomy and relatedness may be better markers of security (perhaps even as effects of prior security) rather than predictors of future changes in security. It may be that the ability to express one’s self autonomously within parental relationships and to maintain relatedness during disagreements grows from a secure attachment to the parent; in other words, it may be an effect rather than a cause.
Predictors%20of%20Change%20in%20Adolescent%20Attachment%20Security.docx