Mothers Insighfulness Oppenheim 2002

IMHJ (Wiley) RIGHT BATCH
top of AH
A R T I C L E
MOTHERS’ INSIGHTFULNESS REGARDING THEIR

CHILDREN’S INTERNAL WORLDS: THE CAPACITY
UNDERLYING SECURE CHILD– MOTHER
RELATIONSHIPS
DAVID OPPENHEIM
Center for the Study of Child Development, University of Haifa
NINA KOREN-KARIE
Social Work and Center for the Study of Child Development, University of Haifa
ABSTRACT: This article introduces a new method to assess mothers’ insightfulness regarding their chil-
dren’s inner world. Maternal insightfulness involves the capacity to see things from the child’s point of
view, and is based on insight into the child’s motives, a complex view of the child, and openness to new
information about the child. Insightfulness is seen as the capacity underlying positive parenting and
providing the context for secure child– parent attachment. In the assessment of insightfulness mothers
view video segments of their interactions with their children and are subsequently interviewed regarding
their children’s and their own thoughts and feelings during the segments. This article describes how the
maternal interviews are coded and provides vignettes of both insightful and noninsightful mothers. Em-
pirical findings supporting the validity of the insightfulness assessment are reviewed, and the implications
for children’s development are discussed.
RESUMEN: Este ensayo introduce un nuevo método para evaluar el discernimiento de las madres en cuanto
al mundo interior de sus hijos. La habilidad materna de poder discernir requiere la capacidad de ver las
cosas desde el punto de vista del niño, y se basa en la perspicacia dentro de los motivos del niño, una
perspectiva compleja del niño, y la disponibilidad a recibir nueva información acerca del niño. La habi-
lidad de discernimiento se ve como una capacidad que apoya una crianza positiva y que provee el contexto
para una segura afectividad entre el niño y la madre. En la evaluación del discernimiento las madres ven
segmentos de video de interacciones entre ellas y sus hijos, y subsecuentemente se les entrevista acerca
de los pensamientos y sentimientos propios y los de sus hijos durante los segmentos presentados. Este
ensayo describe cómo las entrevistas de las madres son codificadas y provee viñetas tanto de las madres
con habilidad de discernir, como de aquéllas que no poseen tal habilidad. Se examinan los resultados
empı́ricos que apoyan la validez de la evaluación del discernimiento, y se discuten las implicaciones en
cuanto al desarrollo del niño.
This research was supported by The Israel Science Foundation (grants number 812-95 and 759-97). Part of this work
was completed while the first author was a visiting scholar at The Children’s Center in Salt Lake City, Utah. Direct
correspondence to: David Oppenheim or Nina Koren-Karie, Center for the Study of Child Development, University
of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel; e-mail: oppenhei@psy.haifa.ac.i or nkoren@psy.haifa.ac.il.
INFANT MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, Vol. 23(6), 593– 605 (2002)

䊚 2002 Michigan Association for Infant Mental Health short
Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/imhj.10035 standard
593 base of drop

IMHJ (Wiley) LEFT BATCH
top of rh
594 ● D. Oppenheim and N. Koren-Karie base of rh
cap height
RÉSUMÉ: Cet article introduit une nouvelle méthode d’évaluation de la perspicacité des mères pour ce base of text
qui concerne le monde intérieur de leurs enfants. La perspicacité maternelle inclut la capacité à voir les
choses du point de vue de l’enfant. Elle est basée sur une compréhension des motifs de l’enfant, un aperçu
complexe de l’enfant, et une ouverture à de nouvelles informations sur l’enfant. La perspicacité est perçue
comme la capacité sous-tendant le parentage positif et offrant le contexte à un attachement enfant-parent
sûr. Pour l’évaluation de la perspicacité les mères regardent des segments vidéo de leurs interactions avec
leurs enfants. Elles sont ensuite interviewées à propos des pensées et des sentiments de leurs enfants
durant les segments, ainsi que des leurs propres. Cet article décrit la manière dont les interview maternelles
sont codées, et offre des vignettes à la fois de mères perspicaces et de mères non perspicaces. Les résultats
empiriques soutenant la validité de l’évaluation de la perspicacité sont passés en revue et les implications
pour le développement de l’enfant sont discutées.
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG: Diese Arbeit stellt eine neue Methode, um die Fähigkeit der Mütter zu untersuchen
sich in die innere Welt der Kinder einzufühlen, dar. Die mütterliche Fähigkeit zur Einsicht beinhaltet die
Fähigkeit Dinge aus der Sicht des Kindes zu sehen und basiert auf der Einsicht in die kindlichen Motive,
einer komplexen Sicht des Kindes und einer Offenheit gegenüber neuen Informationen über das Kind.
Die Fähigkeit zur Einsicht wird als die Fähigkeit gesehen, die positiver Elternschaft zugrunde liegt und
damit den Hintergrund für eine sichere Kind – Eltern Beziehung darstellt. Bei der Bestimmung der
Einsichtsfähigkeit sehen die Mütter Videosequenzen ihrer Interaktionen mit ihren Kindern und werden
in der Folge über ihre Kinder und ihre eigenen Gedanken und Gefühle während der Segmente interviewt.
Diese Arbeit beschreibt wie die mütterlichen Interviews kodiert werden und gibt Beispiele sowohl von
einsichtsfähigen, als auch – unfähigen Müttern. Empirische Ergebnisse, die die Validität der Bestimmung
der Einsichtsfähigkeit unterstützen werden dargestellt und die Bedeutung für die Entwicklung der Kinder
werden diskutiert.
* * *
As is well known, Ainsworth proposed that mothers’ capacity to respond in a sensitive
and responsive way to their infants’ needs is critical for the development of secure infant –
mother attachments (Ainsworth, Bell, & Stayton, 1971; Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978). Perhaps less well known is Ainsworth’s description of sensitive mothers as having the
capacity to see things from the child’s point of view. Ainsworth (1969) writes: “A mother might
be quite aware of and understand accurately the baby’s behavior and the circumstances leading
to her baby’s distress or demands, but because she is unable to empathize with him — unable
to see things from the child’s point of view — she may tease him back in good humor, mock short
him, laugh at him, or just ignore him” (italics added). The goal of this article is to describe a standard
top of rh
Mothers’ Insightfulness ● 595 base of rh
cap height
new method designed to assess mothers’ capacity to see things from the child’s point of view, base of text
which we refer to as insightfulness. We first review the relevant research and clinical back-
ground. Next we elaborate the insightfulness concept and its assessment procedure, after which
we review empirical findings which support the assessment’s validity.
The importance of maternal insightfulness into the child’s internal world has been central
in writings that explore processes underlying caregiving behavior. One of the most pertinent
is Fonagy and colleagues’ notions regarding parental reflective functioning and its significance
for secure infant – mother attachment (Fonagy, Steele, Steele, Leigh, Kennedy, Mattoon, &
Target, 1995; Fonagy, Steele, Steele, Moran, & Higgit, 1991). These authors speculated that
parents’ reflective functioning, that is, their ability to use a nondefensive, open thought process
regarding their children’s mental states, feelings, and the motives underlying their behavior
provides the basis for appropriate, emotionally containing (Bion, 1962) responses. These, in
turn, enable the child to organize his or her feelings in a coherent and effective manner — as
is typical of the securely attached infant. The opposite is also true: parents’ lack of reflective
functioning is presumed to lead to insensitive, emotionally dysregulating caregiving and re-
sultant difficulties in the child’s capacity to organize his or her feelings coherently and effec-
tively — as is typical of the insecurely attached infant. The work described in this article re-
garding the assessment of insightfulness builds upon this theorizing. It also builds on studies
involving mothers’ representations of their children.
In an early study, Bretherton et al. (1989) studied maternal insight and sensitivity as
revealed in the Parent Attachment Interview. Sensitivity/insight involved mothers talking about
sensitive and appropriate responses to children’s communications and having insight into their
own and their children’s behavior and personality. This rating was associated with attachment
security. Related work was conducted by Zeanah and his colleagues, who developed the Work-
ing Model of the Child Interview (Zeanah & Benoit, 1995) and identified three categories of
maternal representations.
Balanced representations conveyed a sense of the caregiver as recognizing and valuing
the infant’s individuality (both positive and negative characteristics) and as empathically ap-
preciating the infant’s subjective experience. Disengaged representations were characterized
by a pervasive sense of emotional distance or indifference toward the infant. The infant’s
subjective experience seemed alien to the caregiver, or if recognized, was not valued. Distorted
representations involved difficulties in remaining focused on the infant, preoccupation by other
concerns, and being overwhelmed by the infant. Results indicated that balanced representations
characterized mothers of secure infants, disengaged representations characterized mothers of
avoidant infants, and distorted representations characterized mothers of ambivalent infants (see
also Benoit, Parker, & Zeanah, 1997).
Although attention to representational processes has been a relatively recent development
in developmental research, mothers’ representations of their children and their appreciation for
the child’s internal experience have been of central interest for clinical writers for quite some
time. Perhaps the most well-known and emotionally evocative account of these processes has
been provided by Fraiberg’s descriptions of “Ghosts in the Nursery” (Fraiberg, Adelson, &
Shapiro, 1975). In this classic article Fraiberg and her colleagues describe how mothers’ rep-
resentations of their children can be so intensely colored by unresolved conflicts and unmet
needs from their own history so that the mother, in effect, is not “seeing” the child, and lacks
insight to the motives and emotions underlying the child’s behavior. Fraiberg further describes
how working through of past conflicts frees the child from maternal projections, allowing
mother to “see” the child and respond empathically to the child’s emotional signals and needs.
Building on Fraiberg, Lieberman has recently proposed a model delineating the way in short
which maternal distorted attributions regarding the motives underlying the child’s behavior standard
top of rh
cap height
effect the child negatively. Lieberman (1997; Silverman & Lieberman, 1999) describes a neg- base of text
ative attribution process that is rigid, closed, and sometimes outright contradictory with ob-
served child behavior. These negative attributions set the stage for alarming and painful self-
fulfilling prophecies. Mothers’ negative attributions (e.g., child is greedy, child is aggressive)
lead to insensitive caregiving behavior (e.g., letting the baby cry for an extended period, re-
sponding harshly and punitively) which, in turn, exacerbate the child’s behavior (e.g., baby
cries more, child becomes more aggressive). If this cycle repeats itself consistently two negative
outcomes result. The “validity” of the distorted maternal attribution is supported (the baby
really is greedy, the baby really is hyperaggressive), and the child’s behavior becomes increas-
ingly concordant with the distorted attribution. According to Lieberman, the child has now
internalized the maternal attribution, with potentially devastating developmental outcomes.
Taken together, the clinical and research literatures converge on the importance of maternal
insightfulness as a critical process underlying caregiving behavior. Positive insightfulness ap-
pears to provide the conditions for sensitive, appropriate, and emotionally regulating caregiving
and lack of insightfulness interferes with such caregiving. Maternal insightfulness is not only
an important influence on caregiving but appears to also have impact on the child. Maternal
insightfulness appears to be beneficial for children’s healthy emotional development and lack
of insightfulness consists a risk factor in terms of children’s sense of security, self-knowledge
and esteem, and sense of competence and efficacy. In sum, while the literature highlights the
importance of insightfulness this construct has not been directly assessed in previous work.
Therefore, the goal of the work presented here is to introduce a newly developed method for
assessing insightfulness — the Insightfulness Assessment (IA; Koren-Karie, Oppenheim, Do-
lev, Sher, Etzion-Carasso, 2002; Oppenheim, Goldsmith, & Koren-Karie, 2001; Oppenheim,
Koren-Karie, & Sagi, 2001).
In the IA mothers are interviewed regarding their children’s and their own thoughts and
feelings after viewing video-taped vignettes of themselves and their children. Transcripts of
maternal interviews are subsequently rated and then classified into one Insightful three non-
insightful groups. We first define insightfulness as assessed in the IA and subsequently describe
the method of assessment, scoring, and classification.
Three main features are involved in the capacity for insightfulness: insightfulness regarding
the motives for the child’s behaviors, an emotionally complex view of the child, and openness
to new and sometimes unexpected information regarding the child.
By insightfulness we refer to the parent’s capacity to invoke motives that underlie the
child’s behavior. Considering such motives is necessarily based on accepting the child as a
separate person with plans, needs, and wishes of his or her own. The motives proposed by the
parent are framed positively and are appropriate to the behavior they are intended to explain.
Both understanding and acceptance are needed when considering such motives. The parent
should be able to understand the motives underlying the child’s behavior, and accompany such
understanding with acceptance of these motives. This stance presumably forms the basis for
appropriate parental responses, especially toward challenging or unrewarding child behavior.
An emotionally complex view of the child involves a believable, convincing portrayal of
him or her as whole person, with both positive and negative features. Positive features are
described openly, sometimes pridefuly, are supported by convincing examples from everyday
life, and typically outweigh negative descriptions. Negative descriptions are provided in a
nonblaming, frank way so that frustrating, unflattering, and upsetting aspects of the child are
discussed within an accepting framework and in the context of attempts to find reasonable and
appropriate explanations for the child’s behavior.
Finally, openness is also central to insightfulness. Rather than imposing a preconceived short
notion of who their child is, insightful mothers are open to see not only the familiar and standard
top of rh
cap height
comfortable aspects of their children but are also open to see without distortion unexpected base of text
behaviors, often updating their view of the child as they talk. Openness also involves the
mother’s attitude towards her own self: She can make use of her observations of herself and
her child to take a new and fresh look at herself as a mother without excessive criticism or, on
the other hand, defensiveness.
The abovementioned features promote parental insightfulness, and we have also identified
features of maternal interviews that constitute barriers to insightfulness. These include anger
at the child, worry about the child or about related issues, and lack of acceptance. Anger and
worry constitute barriers to insightfulness particularly when they are present in the interview
at high levels. In such cases, these emotions appear to function as “filters” through which the
child is perceived and through which his or her internal experience is interpreted. At times,
particularly with regard to high levels of worry, the preoccupation of the mother with herself
or with other issues (e.g., the marital relationship) so dominates the interview that it leaves
little room for seeing the child’s point of view. The behaviors shown on the video segments
and discussed in the interview are mostly viewed through a relative narrow prism colored by
anger or worry, thus limiting the possibility of flexibly considering a wider range of possible
motives or explanations for the child’s behavior.
Lack of acceptance can also act as a barrier to insightfulness. Its expression in the interview
may involve derogation of the child, detachment from or indifference to the child’s internal
experience, or rejection of certain child behaviors or, even, of the child as a whole. Such a
stance violates the basic function of insightfulness, as discussed earlier, which is to provide
the basis for caregiving that promotes healthy emotional development in the child. Interestingly,
such lack of acceptance can sometimes be observed even in conjunction with a moderate degree
of insight into the child’s motives and some understanding of what may lead the child to behave
or feel in a certain way. For example, a mother may compellingly describe her son’s shy,
embarrassed, and self-conscious behavior but proceed to ridicule him for this behavior. Thus,
in this, and in other similar situations, the child does not benefit from his mother’s potential
of understanding his underlying motives and internal experience.
In sum, what is salient in insightful mothers is their capacity to provide an emotionally
complex, accepting picture of the child that includes a wide spectrum of contextually appro-
priate motives while updating their views of the child in accordance with new or unexpected
child behaviors. These qualities appear to be more important than the specific explanations
they provide. Furthermore, insightfulness is not necessarily reflected in warm responses, and
may not always lead to actions that are perceived as empathic by the child. For example,
limiting toddlers’ forays into potentially unsafe situations or imposing limitations regarding
bedtime are not likely to be experienced positively by children. However, such behavior can
very well be expressions of insightfulness, provided they are based on broader, reasonable
parenting goals and deep knowledge about the specific child and the specific context in ques-
tion. Finally, while up to this point we have emphasized the maternal side of the equation, it
is important to keep in mind that maternal insightfulness is embedded in a specific relationship
context and therefore might be influenced by children’s characteristics (e.g., gender, temper-
ament, communication skills) as well.
ASSESSMENT OF INSIGHTFULNESS
The assessment of insightfulness involves two steps: First, parents and children are observed
in several contexts to yield the video vignettes that will serve as the basis for interviewing the
parent, and second, parents are interviewed regarding their perceptions of their children’s short
thoughts and feelings during the segments as well as their own thoughts and feelings. The standard
top of rh
cap height
vignettes are selected according to the age of the children studied (e.g., in a study of pre- base of text
schoolers contexts included building a house together, and in a study of infants a free play
episode). Interviews are transcribed, and following the rationale guiding other attachment-
related interviews (e.g., the AAI, Hesse, 1999; Internal Working Model of the Child Interview,
Benoit, Zeanah, Parker, Nicholson, & Coolbear, 1997), coding of the transcripts focuses not
so much on the content of parents’ speech, but rather on the insightfulness, complexity, and
openness of their thoughts regarding their children. Transcripts are rated on 10 scales and
subsequently classified into one of four groups. The first of the four groups indicates insight-
fulness while the remaining three indicate a lack of insightfulness.
Rating the transcripts on the scales involves marking indicators for the various scales as
they appear throughout the entire transcript, and then assigning a score on each of the scales
based on both frequency and strength of these indicators. The rating scales were: Insight into
child’s motives, ranging from 1 (Mother does not talk about possible motives for her child’s
behavior) to 7 (Mother tries to understand the thoughts and feelings that may underlie her
child’s behavior; she moves freely between the video-taped observations and her knowledge
about her child, draws parallels between the two, and tries to gain deeper understanding);
Openness, ranging from 1 (Mother is not open to the information of the video-taped observa-
tions, but rather speaks about her fixed and preset ideas about the child; the observation may
be dismissed as not typical) to 7 (mother is open to the information arising from the video-
taped observations; she compares her knowledge about her child with the observations and
modifies her perceptions if needed); Complexity in description of child, ranging from 1 (mother
describes the child in a unidimensional, unbalanced way, emphasizing either only positive or
only negative aspects of the child) to 7 (a believable description of the child in which the child
is described as a “whole,” with both positive and negative aspects); Maintenance of focus on
child, ranging from 1 (The child is not the focus of discussion; the description can be rich with
details or short, but the focus is on mother and her feelings and thoughts or issues irrelevant
to the questions asked) to 7 (The child is the focus of discussion; if mother talks about herself,
it will be regarding her maternal role); Richness of description of child, ranging from 1 (limited
responses which lack substance or full responses with mostly irrelevant details) to 7 (mother
responds to the interview questions in a full, comprehensive, and vivid way); Coherence of
thought, ranging from 1 (Mother’s speech does not convey a consistent and clear picture and
the reader finds it difficult to understand what mother means; responses are may contain di-
gressions and contradictions, or mother may ignore the video-taped observations) to 7 (Mother
is focused on the video-taped segments and in her answer she develops ideas in a consistent,
connected, and relaxed way; her speech forms an integrated and clear picture linked both to
the video-taped segments and the child as a whole); Acceptance, ranging from 1( Mother
expresses dissatisfaction or disappointment from the child, or talks about the child in a humil-
iating way) to 7 (Mother accepts the full range of her child’s behaviors and shows tolerance
and understanding towards negative aspects; she is open about difficulties in her child’s be-
havior and conveys a deep acceptance of the child); Anger, ranging from 1 (mother’s speech
does not include current anger even though she can talk about behaviors that caused her in the
past to feel angry) to 7 (current anger towards the child is a central feature of mother’s talk;
the child is described as having many irritating traits, and many of his behaviors on the video-
taped observation elicit anger in mother); Worry, ranging from 1 (Mother expresses belief in
her self and her child’s capacity to cope with challenges) to 7 (Mother’s worry regarding the
child, her maternal behavior, or their relationship is a central, repetitive theme throughout the
interview); Separateness from child, ranging from 1 (Mother finds it difficult to talk about the
child with a sense of clear boundaries; she may talk about the child’s thoughts as if spoken out short
loud, or refers to hypotheses regarding what the child might think or feel as facts) to 7 (Mother standard
top of rh
cap height
sees the child as a separate person, and accepts that the child may sometimes have needs and base of text
wishes that are different or even contradictory to hers).
As described above, the rating scales serve as a basis for the classification of the transcripts
into one insightful and three non-insightful categories. Categories reflected more than a simple
summation of scale scores. Rather, the coding manual provided guidelines as to various con-
stellations and combinations of scale scores that lead to specific categories. The four categories
are:
Positively Insightful (PI)

The main characteristic of these mothers is their ability to see various experiences through their
child’s eyes and to try to understand the motives underlying their child’s behavior. They are
open to the observations of the child on the video segments, and may gain new insights as they
talk. Positively insightful mothers convey acceptance of the child and their speech is coherent.
These mothers talk openly about both positive and negative aspects of their child’s personality
and behavior, as well as of their own caregiving. It is important to stress that mothers classified
as positively insightful, while sharing the above characteristics, were also quite varied. Some
talked about their children in a very warm and emotional manner, while others were more
reserved and had a matter of fact, focused style of speech. Other mothers in this group had a
didactic style and focused on their children’s cognitive competencies and achievements, and
still others were most noted by their self- reflection. Excerpts from a transcript classified pos-
itively insightful follows.
Interviewer: after watching this segment what do you think went through your child’s head?
What was he thinking and feeling? (Question refers to a structured play session of a mother
with her one year old child).
Mother: I think he was interested because these were new things for him . . . especially the
puzzle. He didn’t seem to be bothered but on the other hand he wasn’t too thrilled. He
seemed to be acting as usual, like in an ordinary afternoon.
I: From what we saw, does it tell you something about your child’s personality more gen-
erally, you know, his traits and characteristics?
M: Yes, I think so. I think he is a very alert child, very curious, very explorative. Uhmm..
I think that he is a restless baby compared to other babies, but I think that this is not
essentially a characteristic that is long lasting compared to his other traits or characteristics.
You could see it on the video-tape, he looses interest very quickly and shifts from one toy
to another.
I: How did you feel when you watched this video clip? Did anything surprise you, concern
you, or make you happy?
M: No, all in all it reflects his usual behavior. I was happy that he didn’t take over your
camera and do something to it . . . I can’t say that his behavior surprised me. It was a daily
occurrence and usual and his behavior always makes me happy. I mean, I think he is a very
unique child and he is fascinating because he is always in a mode of exploration. You can
always make him happy and surprise him easily. On the other hand, it can be difficult because
you need to keep your eye open constantly and to be attentive to what he is doing . . . and
he loses his patience very quickly and demands attention. He is not the type of child who short
plays by himself. standard
top of rh
cap height
Several features of the positively insightful classification are noticeable in this example. base of text
The first is a complex view of the child. The mother was able to see the child as a whole
person, describe him in positive terms, and at the same time acknowledge the difficulties. The
sentence “his behavior always makes me happy” is immediately balanced with the “price” of
having such an active child. The second feature is the mother’s acceptance. She describes a
baby who is quite difficult, active, and needing of close attention, but she talks about the baby
in a positive way. She uses words such as “explorative” and “curious,” which show both
acceptance and insightfulness for the developmental tasks of his age. Such behaviors could
have been easily described in a negative manner. For example, the mother could have said that
her baby is difficult and that it is very hard to be a mother of such a baby. In addition, the
restlessness of her baby is seen as a temporary, developmental phase and not as a stable and
global difficult personality characteristic. Finally, an overall quality of this mother’s speech is
her coherence, as reflected in the freshness, richness, and flow of her narrative.
This mothers’ insightfulness is also clearly seen in her response later in the interview after
viewing a diaper changing segment:
I: What went through your child’s head? What was he thinking and feeling?
M: It is very easy to tell. He was probably thinking: “Let me go, it irritates me, you are
bothering me in the middle of my playing. All my games were left on the floor and you
came and took me to the other room, and now I’m lying on my back and can’t move . . . ”
That’s what he was probably thinking . . . After all it doesn’t bother him to stay with a wet
diaper, and so, he doesn’t understand why exactly I am bothering him with that.
This is an example for a fresh, quick, and yet elaborated response. It appears that the
mother commonly thinks about the thoughts and feelings of her child. She is genuinely trying
to understand what in the specific situation made him feel the way he did. At the same time,
she emphasizes that it is her own thinking and so the boundary between herself and her baby
as separate entities remains intact.
One-Sided (Os)
One-sided mothers seem to have a preset conception of the child that they impose on the video-
taped segments, and this conception does not appear open to change. Some One-sided parents
find it difficult to maintain the focus of their speech on the child, and switch to discussing their
own feelings or to other, irrelevant issues. Others overemphasize the child’s positive qualities
and their exemplary relationship without being able to support their statements with episodes
from everyday life or from the video segments. Still others may describe the child as “all
negative” and talk only about his/her faults and misbehaviors. Importantly, some one-sided
parents show warmth and affection in discussing their children. Excerpts from a transcript
classified as one-sided follow.
I: What went through your child’s head? What was he thinking and feeling? (question refers
to a structured play between a mother and her one year old son).
M: Ahh . . . I’m trying to communicate with him, am . . . I’m trying to figure out how
concentrated he can be at this age. It is now much better than 2 or 3 months ago but I still
think they don’t have the ability to concentrate and to focus. What am . . . I’m succeeding
with him only in the area of uhmm . . . a ball for example. Yesterday we were playing, he short
was sitting far away from me and we both spread our legs and he saw that I’m throwing the standard
top of rh
cap height
ball and then he threw it back to me. Or, for example, I bought him a puzzle. I don’t think base of text
he has the ability to concentrate because with me . . . it is interesting . . . personally, I don’t
think . . . and today when I was in kindergarten, I spoke with the teacher and she said that
I’m right, that it is very interesting for her to see how much I am interested in that, that she
has never heard a mother like me who examines the ability of the child to concentrate at
this age . . .
In an additional excerpt, involving questions about a diaper changing episode, the same
mother was asked:
I: How did you feel when you watched the video? Did anything surprise you, or concern
you, or make you happy?
M: There is something that . . . I don’t know if it concerns me but sometimes I take him
and than I can create a situation in which he is with me and then I’m trying to take him. I’m
doing an experiment, in a middle of a situation in which he is playing, I try to see how he
reacts to me when I call him. I can take him while he is completely into the game, and I
taking him, and he resists me, he wants to get back to his play, and then I start, I sing to
him songs like “10 little fingers,” “Butterfly” and than he is with me for a couple of minutes
but immediately he goes back to his play . . .
This mother continues her discussion about her own views and about herself as a teacher,
with little room left for the child.
Several features of the one-sided classification can be identified in this example. First, the
mother is unable to focus on the child as the main subject, and her own thoughts and feelings
become the main focus of her response. For example, when trying to refer to the child’s ability
to concentrate, she immediately shifts the focus to herself noting that even the kindergarten
teacher has “never heard of a mother like her.” In this example one can see how the child’s
voice is left in the background while his mother’s perceptions, concerns and feelings move to
the front of the stage. Consequently, the questions regarding the child’s motives and intentions
were left unanswered. Second, the mother’s speech is incoherent, overwhelming and dysfluent.
She ’jumps’ from one idea to another, and as a result the reader gets an incomplete, fragmented
description of herself and of the child with few insights into the child’s inner world.
Disengaged (De)
Disengaged mothers are characterized by their lack of emotional involvement throughout the
interview. Their answers are short and limited, and they do not use the observation as an
opportunity to reflect upon their child’s and their own behavior. It seems that attempts for
understanding what is on their child’s mind are novel to them and they do not find it pleasurable
or valuable. They may feel comfortable with answers like “I don’t know,” and as a result, the
reader does not get a sense of who the child is. Disengaged mothers talk very little about their
children’s emotions, and prefer talking about their behavior. Many of them emphasize the
child’s ability to be on his own and are pleased with the child’s lack of need for others. Excerpts
from a transcript of a mother of a two year old classified Disengaged follow.
I: What went through your child’s head? What was he thinking and feeling? (Question refers
to a play session using Play-Dough). short
M: I haven’t got a clue. I have no idea what is going on in his mind. What kind of questions standard
top of rh
cap height
are you asking? What is going in his head . . . How do I know what went on in his head? I base of text
have no idea.
I: From what we saw, what does it tell you about your child’s personality more generally,
you know, his traits and characteristics.
M: I guess that he . . . I should say . . . I don’t know about his personality . . . he behaves
like every other child. I don’t see any difference between him and his brothers, for example.
Ordinary.
The following question refers to a parental distraction situation in which mother was asked
to complete a few questionnaires while her child was at her side.
I: After watching this segment what do you think went through your child’s head? What
was he thinking and feeling?
M: He wanted some attention.
I: Where in the video segment did you see that he wants attention?
M: That he didn’t let me complete the questionnaires.
I: Do you have real-life example of that?
M: Children are like mice . . . Ha, .Ha . . .They don’t let you get a minute of peace till they
go to sleep. When they have gone to sleep, then it’s OK.
I: Based on everything that we saw today and from what you know about your child’s
personality more generally, what strikes you most about him as a person?
M: He is smart, he is stubborn and he is cute. That’s it.
Several features of the Disengaged classification are evident in this excerpt. First, there is
no insight into the child’s motives and intentions. This lack of insight is seen right at the
beginning with the mother’s claim that she has no idea what went in her child’s head. Moreover,
the mother does not seem to be bothered by this and does not try to come up with an answer.
Furthermore, as was described above, insightfulness involves the search for the motives un-
derlying the behavior of the specific child. However, this mother does not refer to the child’s
uniqueness but rather says that she can’t see any difference between the child and his brothers.
This brings us to the second feature of the Disengaged classification, namely, the poverty of
the descriptions. The mother does not portray a complex picture of her child. All we know is
that the child is “ordinary.” When the mother is asked specifically to describe her child’s
characteristics she provides a few labels but does not provide examples that will help us know
more about the child’s cuteness and smartness. Third, the mother does not cooperate with the
interviewer questions. She is hostile toward the idea of trying to think about her child’s mind
and at the same time she feels comfortable to speak in a derogatory manner about the child.
Mixed (Mx)
This category involved mothers who do not show one type of speech as defined in the above
categories. Rather, such mothers may respond to one video segment in one style, and to another
segment with a different style. Furthermore, the reader cannot judge which of the styles is
dominant. For example, a mother may sound overwhelmed, unfocused, or hostile in her re- short
standard
top of rh
cap height
sponse to the three video segments, but insightful, complex, and open in her response to the base of text
two general questions.
Reliability
As part of the coding process all identifying information is removed from the transcripts. In
addition, coders are blind to any other information about the mothers or children. In all studies
using the IA 25% of transcripts were coded by two independent coders to obtain interater
reliability figures on both scales and classifications, and these were found to be good and within
the range common to similar measures (Koren-Karie et al., in press; Oppenheim et al., 2001).
Empirical Studies Using the IA

Three studies have provided support for the validity and reliability of the IA. Two studies
focused on the links between the IA and infant – mother attachment (Koren-Karie et al., 2002;
Oppenheim et al., 2001), and both showed that mothers classified positively insightful were
most likely to have had securely attached children, mothers classified one-sided were most
likely to have had insecure/ambivalent children, and mothers classified mixed were most likely
to have had children classified insecure/disorganised. Unexpectedly, no associations were found
between the disengaged classification and children’s attachment. In addition, one study (Koren-
Karie et al., 2002) showed that mothers classified positively insightful were more sensitive in
their interaction with their infants than those not so classified. Importantly, IA classifications
were unrelated to maternal vocabulary or educational level.
A third study involved clinically referred preschoolers during treatment and evaluated the
relationship between improvements in maternal insightfulness and decreases in children’s be-
havior problems (Oppenheim et al., 2001). Findings showed a significant increase in the number
of mothers showing insightfulness following 6 months of treatment. Additional findings linked
improvements in mothers with improvements in children. Therapists’ reports regarding chil-
dren’s behavior problems indicated that following 6 months of treatment there was a significant
drop in both internalizing and externalizing problems, but only for children of mothers classified
as positively insightful.
Taken together, the results of these studies are encouraging. As anticipated, mothers’
insightfulness was associated with infant security. Lack of insightfulness was associated with
insecurity, with specific noninsightful classifications associated with specific insecure types. In
addition, the expected associations between insightfulness and maternal sensitivity were found.
Finally, the IA was useful in a high-risk context as well. Following intervention with both
mothers and children gains in insightfulness were evident, and these were associated with
decreases in children’s behavioral and emotional difficulties. In sum, this article presented a
new method that assesses insightfulness, a capacity that has been given a central role in both
clinical and theoretical writings as the process underlying sensitive and growth promoting
caregiving and secure child – parent attachment, but has not been empirically assessed hereto-
fore.
In closing, there are a few questions that are triggered by this work. First, while we have
stressed the mother’s side, insightfulness is based also on the child’s contribution, particularly
in terms of signaling and communicating his needs, wishes, and thoughts (Oppenheim et al.,
2001). This raises the following question: What happens when the child’s capacity to com-
municate his internal states is impaired, such as is the case in autism? Is insightfulness possible
in such situations, and does it assume the same role as it does with non-affected children? short
standard
top of rh
cap height
Second, what are the developmental implications of insightfulness? Which domains of the base of text
child’s socio-emotional competence are most likely to be affected by the child’s history of
being a recipient of insightfulness? Finally, can the insightfulness assessment be applied beyond
the domain of the relationships between parents and their young children to other close rela-
tionships? Two that appear interesting are marital relationships and therapist – client relation-
ship. We believe that in both types of relationships insightfulness provides the context for
secure, facilitative, and growth-promoting relational contexts, and that the IA methodology can
be applied in these contexts as well.
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M.D.S. (1969). Maternal sensitivity scales. Available: http://www.psy.sunysb.edu/ewaters/

senscoop.htm.
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Bell, S.M., & Stayton, D.J. (1971). Individual differences in strange situation behavior
of one-year-olds. In H.R. Shaffer (Ed.), The origins of human social relations (pp. 17–57). London
and New York: Academic Press.
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M.C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological
study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Benoit, D., Parker, K.C.H., & Zeanah, C.H.. (1997). Mothers’ representations of their infants assessed
prenatally: Stability and association with infants’ attachment classification. Journal of Child Psy-
chology and Psychiatry, 38, 307– 313.
Benoit, D., Zeanah, C.H., Parker, K.C.H., Nicholson, E., & Coolbear, J. (1997). Working model of the
child interview: Infant clinical status related to maternal perceptions. Infant Mental Health Journal,
18(1), 107– 121.
Bion, W.R. (1962). Learning from experience. London: Routledge.
Bretherton, I., Biringen, Z., Ridgeway, D., Maslin, C., & Sherman, M. (1989). Attachment: The parental
perspective. Infant Mental Health Journal, 10, 203–221.
Fonagy, P., Steele, M., Steele, H., Leigh, T., Kennedy, R., Mattoon, G., & Target, M. (1995). Attachment,
the reflective self, and borderline states: The predictive specificity of the Adult Attachment Interview
and pathological emotional development. In S. Goldberg, R. Muir, & J. Kerr (Eds.), Attachment
theory: Social, developmental, and clinical perspectives (pp. 233–278). Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic
Press.
Fonagy, P., Steele, M., Steele, H., Moran, G.S., & Higgit, A.C. (1991). The capacity for understanding
mental states: The reflective self in parent and child and its significance for security of attachment.
Infant Mental Health Journal, 13, 200– 217.
Fraiberg, S., Adelson, E., & Shapiro, V. (1975). Ghosts in the nursery: A psychoanalytic approach to the
problems of impaired infant– mother relationships. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psy-
chiatry, 14, 387– 421.
Hesse, E. (1999). The adult attachment interview: Historical and current perspectives. In J. Cassidy &
P.R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment (pp. 395–433). New York: The Guilford Press.
Koren-Karie, N., Oppenheim, D., Dolev, S., Sher, E., & Etzion-Carasso, A. (2002). Mothers’ empathic
understanding of their infants’ internal experience: Relations with maternal sensitivity and infant
attachment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 534–542.
Lieberman, A.F. (1997). Toddlers’ internalization of maternal attributions as a factor in quality of at-
tachment. In L. Atkinson & K. Zucker (Eds.), Attachment and psychopathology (pp. 277–291). New
York: Guilford Press. short
standard
top of rh
cap height
Oppenheim, D., Goldsmith, D., & Koren-Karie, N. (2001, April). Maternal empathic understanding: Is base of text
it associated with positive therapeutic change in high risk preschoolers? Paper presented at the
biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN.
Oppenheim, D., Koren-Karie, N., & Sagi, A. (2001). Mother’s empathic understanding of their pre-
schoolers’ internal experience: Relations with early attachment. International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 25, 16– 26.
Silverman, R., & Lieberman, A. (1999). Negative maternal attributions, projective identification, and the
intergenerational transmission of violent relational patterns. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 9, 161–186.
Zeanah, C.H., & Benoit, D. (1995). Clinical applications of a parent perception interview in infant mental
health. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 4(3), 539–554.
short
standard

Mothers Insighfulness Oppenheim 2002

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Mothers Insighfulness Oppenheim 2002

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

IMHJ (Wiley) RIGHT BATCH

MOTHERS’ INSIGHTFULNESS REGARDING THEIR

INFANT MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, Vol. 23(6), 593– 605 (2002)

593 base of drop

Positively Insightful (PI)

Empirical Studies Using the IA

Ainsworth, M.D.S. (1969). Maternal sensitivity scales. Available: http://www.psy.sunysb.edu/ewaters/

También podría gustarte