The Development, Psychometric Analyses and Correlates of a Self-Report Measure on Disorganization and Role Reversal
- 158 Downloads
A limited number of measures assess young adults’ perceptions of childhood disorganized and controlling attachment, and although they are empirically strong, the use of these measures can be time consuming and financially straining. The current study aimed to add to the attachment literature by developing a self-report measure, the Childhood Disorganization and Role Reversal Scale (CDRR), to assess for the complexity of those attachment constructs in young adults. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the CDRR using two separate samples of 750 and 656 undergraduate students (601 females; Mage = 18.68, 66.4% Caucasian; 531 females; Mage = 18.68 years, 63.6% Caucasian; respectively), and a community sample of 96 participants (81 females, Mage = 19.27, 65.6% Caucasian). The results of the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) revealed a four-factor structure for both CDRR parent versions. The CDRR mother version includes the Disorganization/Punitive, Mutual Hostility, Affective Caregiving, and Appropriate Boundaries scales, while the CDRR father version includes the Disorganization, Affective Caregiving, Appropriate Boundaries, and Punitive scales. Overall, support was provided for the psychometric properties of the CDRR. For instance, the CDRR scales demonstrated adequate structural stability (confirmatory factor analyses), internal consistency (Cronbach’s coefficient alphas ranged from .78–.95 for mother scale, and .75–.96 or father scale), temporal reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from .68–.89 for mother scale, and .69–.87 for father scale), criterion-related validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. The CDRR will assist researchers in broadening the understanding of psychological outcomes of disorganized and controlling attachment representations in young adulthood.
KeywordsAttachment Disorganized/controlling attachment Parentification Scale development Young adults
M.M.: collaborated in the design and execution of the study, data analysis and writing of the paper. J.F.B.: collaborated in the design and execution of the study, data analysis and writing of the paper.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Ottawa’s Research Ethics Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York, NY: Basic Books. /1982.Google Scholar
- Bowlby., J. (1980). Attachment and loss. Vol. 3. Loss. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Sparks, G. (1973). Invisible loyalties: Reciprocity in intergenerational family therapy. New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
- Bureau, J.-F., Easterbrooks, A., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2009b). The association between middle childhood controlling and disorganized attachment and family correlates in young adulthood. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
- Cassidy, J., & Marvin, R. S. (1992). Attachment organization in preschool children: Procedures and coding manual (Unpublished manual). Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.Google Scholar
- George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). The Adult Attachment Interview protocol (Unpublished manuscript). Berkeley: University of California. /1996.Google Scholar
- George, C., & Solomon, J. (2008). The caregiving system. A behavioural systems approach to parenting. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications (2nd ed.). (pp. 833–856). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Grossmann, K., Grossmann, K. E., Kindler, H., & Zimmermann, P. (2008). A wider view of attachment and exploration: The influence of mothers and fathers on the development of psychological security from infancy to young adulthood. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed.). (pp. 857–879). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Hooper, L. M. (2009). Parentification Inventory. Louisville, KY: Department of Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, Counseling, and College Personnel, University of Louisville.Google Scholar
- Jurkovic, G. J., & Thirkield, A. (1998). Parentification Questionnaire. Atlanta, GA: Department of Psychology, Georgia State University.Google Scholar
- Kerig, P. K. (2005). Revisiting the construct of boundary dissolution: A multidimensional perspective. In P. K. Kerig (Ed.), Implications of parent-child boundary dissolution for developmental psychopathology: “Who is the parent and who is the child?” (pp. 5–42). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press.Google Scholar
- Kerig, P. A., Swanson, J. A., & Ward, R. M. (2012). Autonomy with connection influences of parental psychological control on mutuality in emerging adults’ close relationships. In P. A. Kerig, M. C. Schulz & S. T. Hauser (Eds.), Adolescence and beyond: Family processes and development (pp. 134–153). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lyons-Ruth, K., Bronfman, E., & Parsons, E. (1999). Maternal frightened, frightening, or atypical behaviour and disorganized infant attachment patterns. In J. Vondra & D. Barnett (Eds.), A typical patterns of infant attachment: theory, research, and current directions. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 64 (3, Serial No. 258), 67–96.Google Scholar
- Lyons-Ruth, K., & Jacobvitz, D. (2008). Attachment disorganization: Genetic factors, parenting contexts, and developmental transformation from infancy to adulthood. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications (2nd ed.). (pp. 666–697). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Main, M., & Goldwyn, R. (1985). The Adult Attachment Interview classification and scoring system (Unpublished manuscript). Berkeley, California: University of California. /1995.Google Scholar
- Main, M., & Hesse, E. (1990). Parents’ unresolved traumatic experiences are related to infant disorganized attachment status: Is frightened and/or frightening parental behavior the linking mechanism? In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years (pp. 161–182). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Main, M., Kaplan, N. & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, childhood and adulthood: A move to the level of representation. In I. Bretherthon & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points of attachment theory and research. Growing points in attachment theory and research. Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50(1-2, Serial No. 209), 66–104.Google Scholar
- Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years (pp. 121–160). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Meier, M., Martin, J., Bureau, J.-F., Speedy, M., Levesque, C., & Lafontaine, M.-F. (2014). Psychometric properties of the Mother and Father Compulsive Caregiving Scales: a brief measure of current young adult caregiving behaviors toward parents. Attachment & Human Development, 16(2), 174–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mika, P., Bergner, R. M., & Baum, M. C. (1987). The development of a scale for the assessment of parentification. Family Therapy, 14(3), 229–235.Google Scholar
- Moss, E., Bureau, J.-F., St. Laurent, D., & Tarabulsy, G. (2011). Understanding disorganized attachment at preschool and school age: Examining divergent pathways of disorganized and controlling children. In J. Solomon & C. George (Eds.), Attachment disorganization (2nd ed.). (pp. 52–79). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
- Moss, E., Cyr, C., & Dubois-Comtois, K. (2004). Attachment at early school age and developmental risk: examining family contexts and behaviour problems of controlling-caregiving, controlling–punitive, and behaviourally disorganized children. Developmental Psychology, 40, 519–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill, Inc.Google Scholar
- O’Connor, E., Bureau, J.-F., McCartney, K., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2011). Risk and outcomes associated with disorganized/controlling patterns of attachment at age 3 years in the National Institute of Child Health & Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development. Infant Mental Health Journal, 32, 450–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Criteria for scale selection and evaluation. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 1–15). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar