The perceived quality of maternal care during childhood shapes attentional bias to infant faces in parents and nonparents.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-21 DOI:10.1037/fam0001198
Micol Gemignani, Michele Giannotti, Simona de Falco
{"title":"The perceived quality of maternal care during childhood shapes attentional bias to infant faces in parents and nonparents.","authors":"Micol Gemignani, Michele Giannotti, Simona de Falco","doi":"10.1037/fam0001198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While research has shown that the attentional bias to infant faces predicts the quality of infant care, the antecedents of this cognitive process have been less established. In particular, it remains unknown whether the attentional bias to infant faces might be affected by the interplay between different factors, including memories of past experiences of care, adults' sex, and the experience of parenthood. To extend previous results, we examined the attentional bias to infant faces in a mixed sample of parents (<i>n</i> = 99) and nonparents (<i>n</i> = 102), and whether it varied in relation to parental status, sex, the quality of past experiences of care, and the interactions between these factors. A modified go/no-go task was used to compare the effect of adult and infant faces in retaining adults' attention. Memories of past experiences of paternal and maternal care were collected using the short form of the Italian version of the Parental Acceptance-Rejection scale. Results confirmed that infant faces induced greater attentional interference compared to adult faces. A heightened attention to all types of faces was found in parents versus nonparent. Women, as compared to men, were slower in the task performance, and allocated more attention to infant versus adult faces. Consistent with previous evidence, the attentional prioritization of infant faces varied in relation to previous experiences of care with one's own mother; individuals who remembered a more accepting maternal care allocated more attention to infant versus adult faces. Parental status did not modulate this effect, but sex of participants did. Grounded in the interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (IPARTheory), this study provides new insights for discerning processes that might regulate global adult caregiving. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While research has shown that the attentional bias to infant faces predicts the quality of infant care, the antecedents of this cognitive process have been less established. In particular, it remains unknown whether the attentional bias to infant faces might be affected by the interplay between different factors, including memories of past experiences of care, adults' sex, and the experience of parenthood. To extend previous results, we examined the attentional bias to infant faces in a mixed sample of parents (n = 99) and nonparents (n = 102), and whether it varied in relation to parental status, sex, the quality of past experiences of care, and the interactions between these factors. A modified go/no-go task was used to compare the effect of adult and infant faces in retaining adults' attention. Memories of past experiences of paternal and maternal care were collected using the short form of the Italian version of the Parental Acceptance-Rejection scale. Results confirmed that infant faces induced greater attentional interference compared to adult faces. A heightened attention to all types of faces was found in parents versus nonparent. Women, as compared to men, were slower in the task performance, and allocated more attention to infant versus adult faces. Consistent with previous evidence, the attentional prioritization of infant faces varied in relation to previous experiences of care with one's own mother; individuals who remembered a more accepting maternal care allocated more attention to infant versus adult faces. Parental status did not modulate this effect, but sex of participants did. Grounded in the interpersonal acceptance-rejection theory (IPARTheory), this study provides new insights for discerning processes that might regulate global adult caregiving. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

父母和非父母对儿童时期母亲照顾质量的感知会影响他们对婴儿面部的注意偏差。
虽然研究表明,对婴儿面孔的注意偏向可预测婴儿保育的质量,但这一认知过程的前因却不太确定。特别是,对婴儿面孔的注意偏向是否会受到不同因素(包括对过去照顾经历的记忆、成人的性别和为人父母的经历)之间相互作用的影响,目前仍是未知数。为了扩展之前的研究结果,我们研究了父母(99 人)和非父母(102 人)混合样本中对婴儿面孔的注意偏差,以及这种偏差是否随父母身份、性别、过去照顾经历的质量以及这些因素之间的相互作用而变化。为了比较成人面孔和婴儿面孔在吸引成人注意力方面的效果,我们使用了一个改进的 "去/不去 "任务。此外,还使用意大利语版父母接受-拒绝量表的简表收集了对过去父爱和母爱经历的记忆。结果证实,与成人面孔相比,婴儿面孔引起的注意干扰更大。与非父母亲相比,父母亲对所有类型的面孔都更加关注。与男性相比,女性在完成任务时速度较慢,而且分配给婴儿和成人面孔的注意力更多。与之前的证据相一致的是,婴儿面孔的注意力优先顺序与之前与自己的母亲一起接受照顾的经历有关;记忆中接受母亲照顾较多的个体会将更多注意力分配到婴儿面孔和成人面孔上。父母的身份并不影响这种效应,但参与者的性别却有影响。这项研究以人际父母接受-拒绝理论(IPARTheory)为基础,为辨别可能调节全球成人照料的过程提供了新的见解。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信