Shape step one. Tall Sex X Connection classification (AAI) of Rejecting and you will Forgetting caregiving (possible decisions scales), and you can Rage toward co-father or mother (aura scale), coded about P-CAI interview.
Contour step 1. Tall Sex X Connection classification (AAI) regarding Rejecting and you will Neglecting caregiving (likely conclusion balances), and you can Outrage to the co-mother or father (mood level), coded on the P-CAI interviews.
Univariate aftereffects of AAI class, and you can further article-hoc comparisons, is actually showed for the Dining table cuatro. Since the hypothesized (H2), you will find a whole lot more idealization and derogation of link to the child certainly one of moms and dads categorized because the Dismissive regarding accessory (AAI/D), and more outrage to the the kid plus rage towards the the brand new co-moms and dad one of moms and dads classified since Preoccupied (AAI/E). Since hypothesized (H3), parental shame are highest certainly one of moms and dads categorized since Obsessed in accordance to help you accessory (AAI/E) plus high to have mothers dismissive regarding connection (AAI/Ds), as compared to autonomous (AAI/F) parents. And guaranteeing our hypothesis (H4), preoccupying emotions of being refused from the son was in fact higher certainly one of mothers whose latest connection representations was in fact classified due to the fact Dismissive (AAI/Ds).
Had written on the web:
Table cuatro. Differences in parents’ preoccupying ideas of getting rejected, fury, parental shame, and you may idealization, according to 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(4, 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(step 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 summary of the main effects of mother or father gender and parent attachment category, respectively, and you will connections between the two, and aftereffects of co-parent accessory scriptedness, on more than analyses.
Penned online:
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(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)).
Leave a Reply