This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: A parent whose own working model of attachment is preoccupied/entangled is likely to have an infant ... (Read 41 times)

ec501234

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 573
A parent whose own working model of attachment is preoccupied/entangled is likely to have an infant with which of the following kinds of attachment?
 
  a. Secure.
  b. Anxious ambivalent.
  c. Avoidant.
  d. Disorganized/disoriented.

Question 2

Which of the following is a true statement about the stability of infant attachments?
 
  a. Secure attachments are more likely to change than insecure attachments.
  b. If attachments fail to form by the end of infancy they will never successfully form.
  c. Changes in family stressors that lead to changes in caregiving quality can lead to shifts in attachment quality.
  d. Caregiver interventions cannot change infant attachment quality.



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

BUTTHOL369

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
Answer to Question 1

b

Answer to Question 2

c




ec501234

  • Member
  • Posts: 573
Reply 2 on: Jul 31, 2018
Great answer, keep it coming :)


brbarasa

  • Member
  • Posts: 308
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Excellent

 

Did you know?

Nearly 31 million adults in America have a total cholesterol level that is more than 240 mg per dL.

Did you know?

Medication errors are three times higher among children and infants than with adults.

Did you know?

People about to have surgery must tell their health care providers about all supplements they take.

Did you know?

There are more sensory neurons in the tongue than in any other part of the body.

Did you know?

Although the Roman numeral for the number 4 has always been taught to have been "IV," according to historians, the ancient Romans probably used "IIII" most of the time. This is partially backed up by the fact that early grandfather clocks displayed IIII for the number 4 instead of IV. Early clockmakers apparently thought that the IIII balanced out the VIII (used for the number 8) on the clock face and that it just looked better.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library