Table 5.
Insecure vs. Secure (nonB vs. B) Attachment:Effects upon self- and interactive contingency
| (1) | Infant Gaze | Mother Gaze | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
| Intercept | −.269 | .126 | .036 | Intercept | 2.555 | .129 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | .083 | .175 | .638 | nonBvB | −.284 | .136 | .041 |
| I → I | 3.699 | .084 | < .001 | M → M | 2.766 | .158 | < .001 |
| M → I | .492 | .192 | .011 | I → M | .701 | .122 | < .001 |
| nonBvB • I → I | .015 | .129 | .905 | nonBvB • M → M | −.510 | .200 | .011 |
| nonBvB • M → I | .217 | .286 | .448 | nonBvB • I → M | −.312 | .169 | .065 |
|
| |||||||
| (2) | Infant Facial Affect | Mother Facial Affect | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 56.076 | .387 | < .001 | Intercept | 68.301 | .498 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | .583 | .425 | .175 | nonBvB | −.492 | .404 | .227 |
| I → I | .653 | .015 | < .001 | M → M | .520 | .021 | < .001 |
| M → I | .045 | .014 | .001 | I → M | .143 | .019 | < .001 |
| nonBvB • I → I | .006 | .018 | .739 | nonBvB • M → M | .011 | .018 | .542 |
| nonBvB • M → I | .014 | .021 | .499 | nonBvB • I → M | −.004 | .018 | .813 |
|
| |||||||
| (3) | Infant Vocal Affect | Mother Facial Affect | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 2.843 | .045 | < .001 | Intercept | 67.447 | .464 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | .044 | .067 | .507 | nonBvB | .065 | .334 | .846 |
| I → I | .665 | .014 | < .001 | M → M | .607 | .023 | < .001 |
| M → I | .002 | .0006 | .001 | I → M | 1.521 | .248 | < .001 |
| nonBvB • I → I | −.026 | .018 | .134 | nonBvB • M → M | .026 | .017 | .119 |
| nonBvB • M → I | −.0007 | .0010 | .471 | nonBvB • I → M | −.269 | .354 | .448 |
|
| |||||||
| (4) | Infant Engagement | Mother Engagement | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 11.209 | .133 | < .001 | Intercept | 5.013 | .083 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | .116 | .177 | .516 | nonBvB | −.106 | .088 | .231 |
| I → I | .693 | .011 | < .001 | M → M | .475 | .015 | < .001 |
| M → I | .036 | .026 | .156 | I → M | .066 | .009 | < .001 |
| nonBvB • I → I | −.040 | .016 | .011 | nonBvB • M → M | −.016 | .022 | .479 |
| nonBvB • M → I | .095 | .039 | .015 | nonBvB • I → M | −.005 | .011 | .644 |
|
| |||||||
| (5) | Infant Engagement | Mother Touch | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 11.206 | .127 | < .001 | Intercept | 7.440 | .107 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | .191 | .173 | .273 | nonBvB | −.159 | .079 | .048 |
| I → I | .697 | .010 | < .001 | M → M | .738 | .009 | < .001 |
| M → I | .037 | .017 | .030 | I → M | .004 | .006 | .555 |
| nonBvB • I → I | −.022 | .015 | .140 | nonBvB • M → M | −.009 | .013 | .486 |
| nonBvB • M → I | −.064 | .026 | .016 | nonBvB • I → M | .0001 | .009 | .991 |
|
| |||||||
| (6) | Infant Vocal Affect | Mother Touch | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 3.009 | .017 | < .001 | Intercept | 7.320 | .088 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | −.005 | .014 | .713 | nonBvB | −.161 | .085 | .062 |
| I → I | .690 | .020 | < .001 | M → M | .734 | .009 | < .001 |
| M → I | .004 | .002 | .061 | I → M | .112 | .048 | .020 |
| nonBvB • I → I | −.017 | .018 | .351 | nonBvB • M → M | −.009 | .013 | .528 |
| nonBvB • M → I | −.003 | .003 | .368 | nonBvB • I → M | −.080 | .070 | .251 |
|
| |||||||
| (7) | Infant Touch | Mother Touch | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 1.677 | .046 | < .001 | Intercept | 7.206 | .273 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | −.019 | .012 | .126 | nonBvB | −.159 | .083 | .060 |
| I → I | .813 | .030 | < .001 | M → M | .813 | .047 | < .001 |
| M → I | −.0006 | .002 | .800 | I → M | .164 | .058 | .005 |
| nonBvB • I → I | .025 | .012 | .041 | nonBvB • M → M | −.009 | .014 | .500 |
| nonBvB • M→I | −.004 | .003 | .214 | nonBvB • I → M | −.078 | .069 | .258 |
|
| |||||||
| (8) | Infant Head Orientation | Mother Spatial Orientation | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 5.176 | .089 | < .001 | Intercept | 2.074 | .076 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | .055 | .057 | .339 | nonBvB | −.046 | .031 | .147 |
| I → I | .662 | .015 | < .001 | M → M | .523 | .042 | < .001 |
| M → I | .101 | .045 | .025 | I → M | −.008 | .005 | .068 |
| nonBvB • I → I | .001 | .016 | .973 | nonBvB • M → M | −.087 | .014 | < .001 |
| nonBvB → M→I | .026 | .038 | .491 | nonBvB • I → M | −.002 | .006 | .971 |
|
| |||||||
| (9) | Infant Vocal Affect | Infant Touch | |||||
|
| |||||||
| β | SE | p = | β | SE | p = | ||
|
| |||||||
| Intercept | 2.997 | .013 | < .001 | Intercept | 1.687 | .020 | < .001 |
| nonBvB | −.005 | .014 | .718 | nonBvB | −.023 | .013 | .077 |
| IVQ → IVQ | .667 | .014 | < .001 | ITch → ITch | .771 | .009 | < .001 |
| ITch → IVQ | .037 | .010 | .0004 | IVQ → ITch | .055 | .023 | .018 |
| nonBvB • IVQ→IVQ | −.008 | .018 | .664 | nonBvB • ITch → ITch | .022 | .012 | .072 |
| nonBvB•ITch→IVQ | −.029 | .015 | .056 | nonBvB • IVQ → ITch | .016 | .016 | .335 |
1. Estimated fixed effects (β) of attachment classification in interaction with M → M, I → M, (or I → I, M → I), based on the “basic models;” SE = Standard Error of the Beta.
2. Intercept: estimated β represents the average value of the dependent variable.
3. “nonBvB”: estimated β represents the average amount that the dependent variable is altered by nonB classification; 0 = B, 1 = nonB (insecure attachment: A, C, D).
4. “I → I” (infant self-contingency): estimated β represents the prediction of current infant behavior from the weighted lag of infant behavior, for the secure (B) subgroup.
5. “M → I”: estimated β represents the prediction of current infant behavior from the weighted lag of mother behavior (infant interactive contingency), for the secure (B) subgroup.
6. “nonBvB x I → I”: estimated β represents the effect of non B attachment classification on infant self-contingency. Illustrating this finding with pairing (2), I facial affect self-contingency (I → I) = .653; nonBvB x I → I = .006; thus insecure infants show facial affect self-contingency increased by .006, yielding a β of .659.
7. “nonBvB x M → I”: estimated β represents the effect of nonB attachment classification on infant interactive contingency.
8. Negative signs indicate lower estimates of self- and interactive contingency with insecure attachment.
9. All parameter entries are maximum likelihood estimates fitted using GLIMMIX Macro (gaze) or SAS PROC MIXED (all other modalities).
10. Significant conditional effects of attachment are bolded.