↓ Skip to main content

The infant disorganised attachment classification: “Patterning within the disturbance of coherence”

Overview of attention for article published in Social Science & Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The infant disorganised attachment classification: “Patterning within the disturbance of coherence”
Published in
Social Science & Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sophie Reijman, Sarah Foster, Robbie Duschinsky

Abstract

Since its introduction by Main and Solomon in 1990, the infant disorganised attachment classification has functioned as a predictor of mental health in developmental psychology research. It has also been used by practitioners as an indicator of inadequate parenting and developmental risk, at times with greater confidence than research would support. Although attachment disorganisation takes many forms, it is generally understood to reflect a child's experience of being repeatedly alarmed by their parent's behaviour. In this paper we analyse how the infant disorganised attachment classification has been stabilised and interpreted, reporting results from archival study, ethnographic observations at four training institutes for coding disorganised attachment, interviews with researchers, certified coders and clinicians, and focus groups with child welfare practitioners. Our analysis points to the role of power/knowledge disjunctures in hindering communication between key groups: Main and Solomon and their readers; the oral culture of coders and the written culture of published papers; the research community and practitioners. We highlight how understandings of disorganised attachment have been magnetised by a simplified image of a child fearful of his or her own parent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 158 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 18%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Researcher 7 4%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 63 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 6%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Unspecified 4 3%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 64 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#4,709,632
of 25,637,545 outputs
Outputs from Social Science & Medicine
#4,634
of 11,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,620
of 452,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Science & Medicine
#68
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,637,545 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,963 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.