The purpose of this presentation is to identify and describe the various measures used to assess the quality of primary caregiver-child relationships in the infancy, preschool, school-age and adolescent periods. Measures will also be described that measure attachment to others, such teachers or romantic partners (in adolescence). Measures of attachment differ by developmental level, type of measurement, target of attachment, and purpose of the assessment. Some measures are conducted in a structured lab setting, some in school settings, and some at home. Some instruments are completed by parents, some by teachers, and some by individuals who have special training in assessing attachment. Behavioral and interview/questionnaire measures for each developmental period will be described with regard to outcome of interest. For example, in the preschool period, one may be interested in the security of attachment or in the quality of the attachment relationship. Different measures yield different information, which is important to consider in meeting intervention goals. By providing a list of appropriate attachment measurement instruments, along with their validity and reliability information, and when it is appropriate and practical to use each kind of measure would be a helpful resource to school psychologists.
 

Quality of attachment to the primary caregiver has long-ranging implications for later functioning. Early parent-child attachment relationships may form the prototype for the development of relationships with others. They also help to form an "internal working model" of one's self-worth and what kinds of care can be expected from others. This internal working model guides our expectations about treatment from the social world. The purpose of this poster is to identify and describe the various measures used to assess quality of primary caregiver-child relationships in the infancy, preschool, school-age and adolescent periods. Measures of attachment differ by developmental level, type of measurement, target of attachment, and purpose of the assessment. Some measures are conducted in a structured lab setting, some in school settings, and some at home. Some instruments are completed by parents, some by teachers, and some by individuals who have special training in assessing attachment. Behavioral and interview/questionnaire measures for each developmental period are described with regard to outcome of interest. For example, in the preschool period, one may be interested in the security of attachment or in the quality of the attachment relationship. Different measures yield different information, which is important to consider in meeting intervention goals.

Ainsworth Strange Situation
 

This structured laboratory procedure consists of 8 3-minute episodes of increasing stress. During the procedure infants are exposed to an adult female stranger and two short separations from the mother. Behaviors assessed include proximity-seeking and maintaining, avoidance, and resistance. The procedure is usually videotaped for coding. Children are classified into one of 4 categories, called secure, resistant, avoidant, or disorganized. It is assumed that these categories reflect the quality of parenting infants have received during their first year. Reliability and construct validity are excellent. Extensive training is required to code children's attachment classification using this procedure. Suitable for infants 12-24 months old.
 

Attachment Q-Set
 

Waters and Dean's measure attempts to rate the degree of security of attachment. It also attempts to differentiate attachment from constructs such as sociability and dependency. The instrument can be completed by parents or independent observers. Reliability is adequate, and validity is currently under study. 12-36 months.
 
 

Cassidy-Marvin System
 

This modification of the strange situation assesses 3- and 4-year-olds' mother-child attachment. It uses a 7-point avoidance scale and a 9-point security scale. Four categories of attachment result, as in the strange situation. There are two types of disorganized (controlling) attachment: hostile and punitive or caregiving. Good reliability and predictive and concurrent validity.
 

Main-Cassidy System
 

Six-year-olds experience a 1-hour separation. Reunion behaviors with the mother are considered to be particularly important. Avoidance and security are measured on a 7-point scale. Attachment categories are the same as above.
 

Story Completion
 

Three-year-olds complete 5 stories by manipulating small family figures which act out an ending to a story. As a set, the stories allow the child to reveal expectations about the attachment figure as an authority figure and source of comfort and protection. Children can be classified as secure or insecure in attachment. Validity of the instrument is weak.
 

Klagsbrun-Bowlby Adaptation of the Hansburg Separation Anxiety Test
 

Six photographs of young children experiencing separations from their parents are presented. This measure is appropriate for children 4-7 years of age. Projective responses are scored for emotional openness and constructive coping. Concurrent validity is acceptable.
 

Kaplan & Main's Family Drawings System
 

This is an analysis of a family drawing which includes a checklist of signs for each of the attachment categories and global rating scales. Used with kindergarten children and 8-9 year olds. Reliability and validity adequate.

Separation Anxiety Test
 

This is a semistructured interview that taps into children's thoughts and feelings about attachment. Children are shown pictures with a child target experiencing separation. Children are scored for emotional openness, coherence of discourse, anger, pessimism, and blame. Reliability is acceptable.
 
 

Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment
 

Armsden and Greenberg developed a measure of adolescent attachment to peers and parents. Suitable for individuals 12-18 years old. Degree of trust, quality of communication, and degree of anger and alienation are assessed. Reliability and predictive validity are relatively high.
 

Adult Attachment Interview
 

This is a structured, 15-question, semiclinical interview that focuses on the interviewee's early attachment experiences and current thoughts about them. From a printed transcript of the interview, the coder's task is to assign a single classification for the individual's overall "state of mind with respect to attachment." Individuals are rated on a 9-point scale for security, largely defined largely by coherence. Individuals are classified as secure, dismissing, preoccupied, or unresolved. Good reliability and validity.
 

Hazan and Shaver's Romantic Attachment Scale
 

Self-report measure in which individuals indicate which statement (describing the 3 attachment styles of secure, avoidant, and ambivalent) best describes themselves. Good predictive and construct validity.
 

Bartholomew's Attachment Interview and Self-Report Measure
 

Individuals are categorized into one of 4 groups, depending upon image and image of others. The categories are: secure, avoidant-dismissing, avoidant-fearful, and preoccupied. Good reliability and construct validity.

Current Relationship Interview
 

This interview-based measure was constructed to measure the hypothesis that adult attachment relationships are similar to attachment relations between parent and child. Individuals are classified into one of 3 categories: secure, dismissing, preoccupied. Scoring is similar to the AAI. Reliability acceptable.
 
 

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 

Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The Inventory of Parent and Peer

Attachment: Relationships to well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and

Adolescence, 16, 427-454.
 

Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test

of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.
 

Bretherton, I., Ridgeway, D., & Cassidy, J. (1990). The role of internal working models

in the attachment relationship: Theoretical, empirical, and developmental

considerations. In M. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, and E. M. Cummings (Eds.),

Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research, and intervention (pp. 273-320). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 

Cassidy, J. (1988). Child-mother attachment and the self in 6-year-olds. Child Development, 59, 121-134.
 

Fury, G., Carlson, E. A., & Sroufe, L. A. (1997). Children's representations of attachment relationships in family drawings. Child Development, 68, 1154-1164.
 

Grossmann, K. E., & Grossmann, K. (1991). Attachment quality as an organizer of

emotional and behavioral responses in a longitudinal perspective. In C. M.

Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds.), Attachment across the life

cycle (00. 93-114). London: Tavistock/Routledge.
 

Kerns, K. A., Tomich, P. L., Aspelmeier, J. E., & Contreras, J. M. (2000).

Attachment-based assessments of parent-child relationships in middle childhood.

Developmental Psychology, 36, 614-626.
 

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.
 

Main, M., & Cassidy, J. (1988). Categories of response to reunion with the parent at age

6: Predictable from infant attachment classifications and stable over a 1-month

period. Developmental Psychology, 24, 415-426.
 

Main, M., & Goldwyn, R. (1985). Adult attachment classification and rating system.

Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Berkeley.
 

Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, childhood, and

adulthood: A move to the level of representation. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters

(Eds.), Growing points in attachment theory and research (pp. 66-106).

Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50(1-2, Serial

No. 209).
 

Waters, E. (1995). The Attachment Q-Set. In E. Waters, B. E. Vaughn, G. Posada, & K. Kondo-Ikemura (Eds.), Caregiving, cultural, and cognitive perspectives on secure-base behavior and working models. Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60(2/3, serial No. 244, 247-254.