Development and Psychopathology, 14 (2002), 279–291

Copyright  2002 Cambridge University Press

Printed in the United States of America

Joint attention and disorganized attachment

status in infants at risk

ANGELIKA H. CLAUSSEN, PETER C. MUNDY, SANGEETA A. MALLIK,

AND JENNIFER C. WILLOUGHBY

University of Miami

Abstract

The development of joint attention skills is a major milestone of infancy. Recent research suggests that the development of these skills may be affected by disorganized (D) attachment. This hypothesis was examined in a longitudinal study of attachment and joint attention skill development in a sample of infants at risk for developmental–behavioral morbidity. The results revealed that toddlers with D classifications initiated joint attention with an experimenter significantly less often than did secure, or even other insecure, toddlers. However, no group differences in the capacity to respond to the joint attention bids of others were observed in this study. These data suggest that a disturbance in the tendency to initiate episodes of joint attention with others may be indicative of

early social–cognitive and social–emotional disturbance among infants affected by disorganized attachment status. Theory and research is reviewed to suggest that an early impairment in joint attention facility may make a significant contribution to risk for negative cognitive and emotional outcomes among these infants.

The development of the capacity to share or Smith, 1996; Yoder, Warren, McCath-

coordinate attention with a social partner is a


ren, in press). It is less well recognized, though,

major milestone of infancy (e.g., Bakeman that research on joint attention skills may also

Adamson, 1984; Bruner, 1981; Mundy


contribute to a better understanding of the in-

Gomes, 1997; Tomasello, 1995). This broad tegration of social–emotional and cognitive

capacity is often referred to as “joint atten-


processes in infancy, especially as these affect

tion” skill development (e.g., Carpenter, Na- risk or vulnerability to psychopathology (Mundy

gell, Tomasello, 1998). The study of joint


Willoughby, 1998).

attention skills is commonly associated with Significant individual differences in joint

theory on social cognition or language acqui-


attention skill development are evident in in-

sition, and it has provided important new per- fancy (Mundy Gomes, 1998), and these in-

spectives on the nature of atypical, as well as


dividual differences may be determined by so-

typical, early development (e.g., Baldwin, 1995; cial processes, as well as factors associated

Carpenter et al., 1998; Corkum Moore, 1998;


with cognition and temperament (Mundy

Morales, Mundy, & Rojas, 1998; Mundy Willoughby, 1996, 1998). Specifically, the

Neal, 2001; Sigman Ruskin, 1999; Ulvund

The research described in this paper was conducted with the support of DOE-OSE Grant H023C30079, NIMH/B-


tendency of an infant to engage in social shar- ing or joint attention may be affected by the early social–emotional aspects of the care- giving environment (Adamson Russell, 1999;

Start Grant MH53975-01, SAMHSA Grant SPO8984, and Flanagan, Coppa, Riggs, & Alario, 1994;

the philanthropy of Infants In Need (www.iin.org). Goldsmith Rogoff, 1997; Mundy, Kasari,

Address correspondence and reprint requests to: An- Sigman, 1992; Raver Leadbeater, 1995;

gelika Claussen, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, Psy-

chology Annex, University of Miami, 5665 Ponce de

Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, FL 33146-0720; E-mail:


Theory and research suggest that an in-

. fant’s tendency to engage in joint attention

279

280


A. H. Claussen et al.

with others is optimized in a responsive and The validation of the D attachment classifi-

affectively positive caregiving environment


cation as a category used to describe atypical

(Adamson Russell, 1999; Wachs Chan, infant attachment behavior has been a focus

1986). Alternatively, less responsive and more


of recent studies (van Ijzendoorn, Schuengel,

negatively toned caregiving may be less opti- & Bakersman–Kranenburg, 1999). Current

mal with regard to the infant’s development


views suggest that nonstrategic, disorganized

of joint attention skills (Flanagan et al., 1994; attachment behaviors arise from characteris-

Goldsmith Rogoff, 1997); that is, individ-


tics of the environment, such as maltreatment

ual differences in infant joint attention skill and unpredictable and/or fear evoking care-

development reflect, in part, the degree to


giving, but may also be influenced by charac-

which joint attention bids have become so- teristics within the child, such as behavioral

cially rewarding for the child (Corkum


organization and cognition (Barnett, Butler,

Moore, 1998; Mundy Willoughby, 1996; Vondra, 1999; Barnett, Ganiban, Cicchetti,

1998).


1999; Carlson, 1998; Main, 1996; Lyons–

This line of theory leads to the expectation Ruth Jacobvitz, 1999; Spangler, Fremmer–

that infant joint attention skills may be asso-


Bombik, Grossmann, 1996). Disorganized

ciated with qualitative aspects of caregiving, attachment, though, is not considered to be a

including the emotional quality of the care-


function of children’s temperament (van Ij-

giver–infant relationship, such as those as- zendoorn et al., 1999).

sessed by measures of attachment (Mundy


Although secure attachment functions as a

Willoughby, 1996, 1998). However, although protective factor, it appears as though the pri-

some qualitative aspects of caregiving have


mary categories of insecure attachment (inse-

been found to be related to infant joint atten- cure–avoidant and insecure–ambivalent) are

tion processes (Flanagan et al., 1994; Gold-


not always maladaptive or necessarily indica-

smith Rogoff, 1997; Raver Leadbeater, tive of risk (Belsky, 1999; Weinfield, Sroufe,

1995), little research has directly examined


Egeland, Carlson, 1999). The D classifica-

the relations between attachment and infant tion may be a more consistent attachment re-

joint attention skill development. The paucity


lated risk index (Crittenden, 1999; van Ijzen-

of this research is surprising given the puta- doorn et al., 1999). Infants who experience

tive central role of joint attention in the early


more extreme forms of insensitive caregiving

development of social and cognitive compe- may lack the behavioral complexity to develop

tence (Adamson, 1995; Tomasello, Kruger,


organized strategies (Barnett et al., 1999; Crit-

Ratner, 1993) and the link between attach- tenden, 1999). Indeed, D attachment classifi-

ment and the development of social and cog-


cation may be viewed as a marker of risk for

nitive competence (e.g., Thompson, 1999; van maladaptive or psychopathological develop-

Ijzendoorn, Dijkstra, Bus, 1995). Indeed,


ment (Barnett et al., 1999; Greenberg, 1999;

Scho¨ lmerich, Lamb, Leyendecker, and Fra- Main, 1996) and predicts the presentation of

casso (1997) have recently observed a relation


behavior problems in childhood (e.g., Carl-

between attachment and social attention coor- son, 1998; Lyons–Ruth, Alpern, Repacholi,

dination in mother–child interactions. In this


1993; Moss, Parent, Gosselin, Rousseau,

study, dyads that were classified as insecure at St. Laurent, 1996; van Ijzendoorn et al., 1999).

13 months in the standard Ainsworth Strange


Research also points to the association of dis-

Situation paradigm were significantly less like- organized attachment classifications with prob-

ly than secure dyads to display either coordi-


lems in interactive and communicative pro-

nated face-en-face attention or coordinated cesses (Moss, St. Laurent, Parent, 1999;

joint attention to objects. However, a robust


Spangler Grossman, 1999). Whereas secure

effect was evident only for infants classified attachment is associated with positive aspects

as disorganized. This may be because, among


of interactive competence (Thompson, 1999),

indices of attachment status, disorganized the disorganized pattern is associated with poor

classification is indicative of more extreme


interactive competence (Moss et al., 1999;

disturbance in social emotional development. Solomon George, 1999).

American Speech—Language Pathology.