Skip to content
Frontiers
Search

Original Research

Frontiers in Developmental Psychology ·

Volume 4 - 2026 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fdpys.2026.1838099

The relationship between recalled parental care, domestic violence, and infant-related mind-mindedness among mothers in urban India

  • Mrinmayee Bhide1
  • Harshini Manohar2
  • T. A. Supraja1
  • Laura Bozicevic3
  • Helen Sharp3*corresponding author
  • Prabha S. Chandra1
  1. 1Department of Psychiatry, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
  2. 2Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
  3. 3Department of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Article metrics0 viewsView details
PDFCiteMetrics

Abstract

In spite of extensive evidence on the predictors of infant-related mind-mindedness (MM) in the Western context, its relevance to South Asian mothers is largely unexplored. The study examined whether mothers' own recalled parental bonding and exposure to domestic violence (DV) in the post-natal period are associated with their later caregiving behavior, assessed as infant-related mind-mindedness (MM) in a community sample of urban Indian mothers. In addition to testing the independent contribution of recalled parental bonding and post-natal DV to MM, we further examined whether presence of DV at any point during the first year postpartum, conceptualized as a significant relational stressor, might moderate any associations observed between recalled parental bonding and MM. This hypothesis was informed by theoretical perspectives suggesting that early relational experiences may increase vulnerability to maladaptive relational dynamics and later victimization in adulthood, with cumulative stressors potentially disrupting maternal representations and caregiving behavior. Data from a subsample of 338 mothers was analyzed from the Bangalore Child Health and Development Study. MM was coded from Five-Minute Speech Samples obtained at infant age 1 year. Mothers' recalled parental bonding was assessed on the Parental Bonding Instrument. Presence of postpartum DV was assessed with the Indian Council of Medical Research-Domestic Violence Scale. Multiple linear regression and moderation analyses were conducted. After adjusting for sociodemographic variables and verbosity, recalled high maternal care marginally predicted MM (β = 0.137, p = 0.065), albeit at trend-level significance. We did not find any main effects of recalled paternal care, maternal and paternal overprotection, or post-natal DV in predicting MM. No significant interaction between DV during first year postpartum and recalled parental care or overprotection in predicting MM was observed. The study findings provide tentative support for intergenerational transmission of parenting. To our knowledge, this is the first study in South Asia examining the association of recalled parental bonding and levels of mind-mindedness among parents of young infants. These findings require replication in populations who typically demonstrate higher levels of MM. The study highlights the need for careful consideration of socio-cultural context, emphasizing the need for culturally-informed measurement approaches to capture maternal representation of infants and perception of parenting in non-Western contexts.

Keywords

1 Introduction

Within the context of the early parent-infant relationship, maternal mind-mindedness (MM), the caregivers' proclivity to view their child as an individual with a mind rather than an entity whose needs must be met, has emerged as a critical dimension of caregiving (Meins, 1999), in studies pre-dominantly conducted in the West (McMahon and Bernier, 2017). Evidence suggests mind-mindedness is a multifaceted construct linked to parental sensitivity (Farrow and Blissett, 2014; Meins, 1999; Zeegers et al., 2017) and to child socio-cognitive developmental outcomes like executive functions, language abilities, and social cognition (Aldrich et al., 2021; Hughes et al., 2018), and attachment security (Laranjo et al., 2008; Meins et al., 2012; Zeegers et al., 2017). Therefore, it is important to first identify the factors associated with mind-mindedness within maternal caregiving in order to understand in what contexts mothers show higher levels than others, and second, to examine whether similar findings are observed across different cultural settings where approaches to caregiving may differ. We report the first study in India to examine antecedents of mind-mindedness and test whether the presence of ongoing relational stressors moderates the strength of such associations.

Mind-mindedness can be assessed using either interactional measures, wherein the caregiver–child interactions are observed in play-based or attachment-activating contexts, and caregivers' mind-related comments are coded as appropriate to child's signals or not; or representational measures, where caregivers are asked to describe their child, and these narrative descriptions are transcribed and coded for presence of references to the child's mental states (McMahon and Bernier, 2017). The latter measure is more akin to measures of parental reflective functioning (Slade, 2005). The literature includes studies using both these approaches to measurement, and in our study, we use the latter method.

A range of candidate antecedents that might shape maternal mind-mindedness have been examined previously. However, again most of this evidence derives from Western settings. Among these, the influence of maternal psychopathology on MM has been examined across several conditions, including severe mental illnesses—bipolar disorder and schizophrenia (Schacht et al., 2017), depression (Georg et al., 2023), and borderline personality disorder (Marcoux et al., 2017; Schacht et al., 2013; Zitzmann et al., 2025). Although prospective associations between depressive symptoms and reduced MM have been demonstrated (Bigelow et al., 2018; Reese et al., 2019), meta-analytic evidence including a large sample of 12,665 participants, from 63 studies, reported only a weak non-significant overall correlation between maternal depression and mentalizing abilities (r = −0.06), operationalized through measures of mind-mindedness, parental reflective functioning, and parental insightfulness (Georg et al., 2023). Among sociodemographic factors, higher maternal age is associated with higher MM (Camberis et al., 2016), whereas evidence for association with maternal education and socio-economic status is mixed (McMahon and Bernier, 2017). Parity and child sex, although frequently adjusted for in analyses, have not been found to exhibit significant associations with mind-mindedness (Farrow and Blissett, 2014; Hill and McMahon, 2016; Illingworth et al., 2016).

Other work suggests that mothers' own childhood experiences of bonding with their parents contribute to shaping their own later caregiving behaviors (Bowlby, 1982; van IJzendoorn, 1995). Identifying the mechanisms underlying these associations is thought to be central to understanding intergenerational transmission of caregiving patterns. Substantial evidence supports the occurrence of this intergenerational transmission, shaped by genetic (Elmadih and Abumadini, 2019; Gervai, 2009), social learning (Vygotsky and Cole, 1978), environmental (Madden et al., 2015; Rothenberg et al., 2023; Solomon and George, 2006), and attachment-related mechanisms (Fearon et al., 2010; van IJzendoorn and Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2019).

In the literature there is considerable variation in how parents' own childhood experiences of bonding with their parents are conceptualized, described, and measured across studies. Research employing the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) typically operationalises the construct as ‘attachment state of mind' (Bernier and Dozier, 2003; George et al., 2003), whereas studies using the parental bonding instrument (PBI) frame the construct as ‘parental bonding' (Chiu, 2023; Parker, 1990). More recent literature adopts a broader conceptualization, framing the construct as ‘parent's attachment' (Assen, 2023). In the present study, to ensure conceptual clarity and consistency, we refer specifically to mothers' own childhood experiences of bonding with their parents, assessed by PBI as recalled parental bonding, operationalised as recalled maternal or paternal care and overprotection.

Given its location at the interface of parental representations and observable parent–infant interactions, mind-mindedness is positioned as a relational construct (Hill and McMahon, 2016; Meins et al., 2014), and has been proposed as a potential mechanism for intergenerational transmission of attachment (McMahon and Bernier, 2017; Meins, 1999). However, empirical evidence linking constructs of attachment state of mind, recalled parental bonding, and broader parental attachment representations to mind-mindedness remains limited. Some studies report that more optimal parental attachment representations are associated with higher levels of mind-mindedness (Arnott and Meins, 2007; Demers et al., 2010; Tharner et al., 2016), whereas others find null or inverse associations (Bernier and Dozier, 2003; Milligan et al., 2015). To our knowledge, no studies have yet examined the relationship between parents' recalled experiences of care and their own subsequent infant-related mind-mindedness in South Asian contexts.

While early parental bonding experiences are thought to establish a baseline “internal working model” of caregiving, these representations are not thought to operate as deterministic risk factors. Ongoing relational trauma might act as a severe environmental disruptor that may overwrite or impair a mother's current capacity to mentalize. In this context, experiencing domestic violence (DV), particularly during the perinatal period, has gained attention as a potent relational stressor that can disrupt caregiving behaviors and affect child developmental trajectories (Kim et al., 2024). Global estimates suggest the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) among pregnant women can be as high as 25% in some settings (Román-Gálvez et al., 2021). ‘Domestic violence' (DV) is defined as abuse perpetrated by any member of the household, particularly relevant in shared households, whereas ‘Intimate partner violence' denotes physical, sexual, or psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner (World Health Organization, 2012). Ongoing experiences of DV especially during the perinatal period may disrupt maternal representations of the child, undermine maternal mental health, and impact sensitive caregiving (Bogat et al., 2023).

A closely related construct to MM is parental reflective functioning (PRF), a parents' mental capacity to understand their own and their children's behaviors in terms of envisioned mental states. PRF has been studied in mothers with histories of abuse and neglect. Camoirano (2017) highlighted that mothers with trauma histories often demonstrate poor PRF, theorizing that the difficulties in mentalizing past traumatic experiences interfere with their capacity for adequate reflection and caregiving in their current parent-child relationship (Camoirano, 2017). Evidence from studies of MM also suggests that trauma-related processes may impact caregiving representations. In a sample of 212 adolescent mothers, past trauma exposure and maternal symptoms of PTSD did not have direct associations with MM. However, moderated associations were observed such that the typically protective association between higher MM and better toddler outcomes was absent in mothers with full PTSD and present for those without PTSD. This finding suggests mothers who continue to experience PTSD symptoms may exhibit altered representations of their child's mental states, which may not function in a protective way. Together, these findings highlight that trauma-related processes may potentially alter intergenerational outcomes (Easterbrooks et al., 2017).

In summary, mothers' recalled parental bonding and ongoing relational stressors, such as experiences of DV, may represent important possible antecedents to caregiving behaviors, that are underexplored globally. This investigation is particularly relevant within South Asian cultural contexts, where parenting norms, relational hierarchies, and expressions of caregiving differ markedly from Western settings. Specifically, traditional South Asian caregiving ethno-theories often prioritize hierarchical respect, family-relatedness, and duty over the promotion of psychological independence and individual autonomy (Kagitcibasi, 2005). Because mind-mindedness fundamentally relies on viewing the child as an independent psychological being (Meins, 1999), the explicit verbalization of an infant's autonomous mental state might not be the primary vehicle for sensitive caregiving in non-Western populations. This makes the population critical for testing the boundaries of the construct of MM beyond the Western-centric or Euro-American context (Kagitcibasi, 2005). Further, such inquiry is especially salient in settings where rates of domestic violence are higher than in western settings (Mishra et al., 2024; Román-Gálvez et al., 2021), and where research on parental mind-mindedness remains largely underrepresented (McMahon and Bernier, 2017).

This study examined the relationship between mothers' recalled parental bonding, experiences of DV in the post-natal period, and infant-related mind-mindedness (MM) at infant age 1 in a community sample of Indian urban mothers. In addition, we examined whether DV in the post-natal period moderated any associations observed. We hypothesized that mothers reporting optimal recalled parental bonding (i.e., high care and low overprotection) would exhibit higher levels of MM, and those reporting experiences of DV in the post-natal period will have lower levels of MM. In line with the theoretical link between early relational influences and later victimization in adulthood, posited due to increased vulnerability to maladaptive relational dynamics (Riggs, 2010; Widom et al., 2008), we further hypothesized an interaction between recalled parental bonding and post-natal domestic violence in predicting infant-related mind-mindedness, such that any associations observed between high recalled care and MM or low recalled overprotection and MM would be disrupted in the presence of DV.

2 Methods

2.1 Participants

Data were drawn from 338 mothers participating in the Bangalore Child Health and Development Study (BCHADS), a prospective longitudinal cohort of 909 women and their infants from urban Bangalore, India. The study was designed as a parallel cohort to the UK-based Wirral Child Health and Development Study (WCHADS), employing comparable measurement strategies to identify early risk and protective factors for child mental health in UK and India. A total of 909 pregnant women were recruited between July 2014 and November 2016 when attending antenatal appointments from Government Urban Maternal Health Clinic in Bengaluru, India. These sites primarily serve women from low-resource settings, reachable from the study site.

Pregnant women attending routine antenatal appointments were approached and screened for eligibility between the first or second trimesters of pregnancy (13–24 weeks' gestation). Women with no history of severe mental illness, no significant medical complications during the index pregnancy, no harmful use of alcohol or other psychoactive substances, the ability to complete assessments in the study language, and an intention to continue residing in Bengaluru after childbirth were included. Eight hundred thirty women had live singleton births and were eligible for post-natal assessments. Cohort assessments were conducted during each trimester of the pregnancy, 8 weeks, 6, 12 and 24 months postpartum, followed by 3–5, 5–7 and 7–9 years of child's age. The present study is focused on measures administered at initial recruitment (socio-demographic data), and at the 8 week, 6, 12 and 24-month timepoints only.

Since the sample was drawn from the ongoing prospective cohort study, cohort size was determined at the time of initial recruitment and was not based on an a priori power calculation specific to the present analyses. A post-hoc sensitivity analysis was conducted for the regression and moderation analyses (see Results).

The current study includes all participants from the cohort with complete data on the variables of interest, comprising a subsample of 338 mothers. The study process flow is depicted in Figure 1.

Study process flow.
Figure 1. Study process flow.

Written informed consent was obtained from all participating mothers. Ethical approval for the study was granted by the National Institute for Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS) Ethics Committee on 2nd July 2015 and by the University of Liverpool Ethics Committee on 1st March 2016.

2.2 Measures used

2.2.1 Five minute speech sample (FMSS)−12 months postpartum

Mind-mindedness was coded from maternal utterances (i.e. unit of speech) generated during the Five-Minute Speech Sample (FMSS), in which mothers were encouraged to speak about their child for 5 min, (although not all used the full allotted time), in response to an open-ended invitation to describe their child (Sher-Censor, 2015). These spontaneous speech samples were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and translated from Kannada/Urdu /Tamil (local vernacular languages that mothers were proficient in) into English.

2.2.1.1 Reliability training

The uninterrupted, spontaneous speech was coded for mind-minded comments as per the Mein's Mind-Mindedness Coding Manual (Meins and Fernyhough, 2015). The researcher (MB) underwent training for coding under a research-reliable coder. The training included regular discussions, feedback, and assessments of inter-rater reliability. To assess coding reliability, ~10% of the main dataset (n = 50) were independently coded by the researcher and the research-reliable coder. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.83, calculated using a one-way random effects model, was achieved. After achieving coding reliability, the researcher independently coded the remaining transcripts. Any doubts and clarifications were resolved in discussion with the research-reliable coder and the team.

2.2.1.2 Mind-mindedness coding and scoring

Each utterance by the mother in FMSS was categorized as either child-related/ non child-related. Child-related attributes were further coded as either mental or non-mental (behavioral, physical, or general) attributes. Mental attributes refer to any comments that describe the child's mental states such as wishes, interests, pretense, imagination, mind, intellect, memory, knowledge, metacognition, any comments on child's desires, preferences, likes, and dislikes, child's emotions, and any comments spoken on behalf of the child. Non-mental attributes included behavioral attributes (any comments on the child's interactions on a behavioral level), physical attributes (any comments based on the child's appearance, age) and general (any comments that do not classify into any of the above categories). Exact repetitions mentioned during the interview were excluded from coding.

The frequency of mental attributes was used as the primary measure of representational mind-mindedness. Non-mental attributes were accounted for to control for maternal verbosity, as suggested by Mein's Mind-Mindedness Coding Manual (Meins and Fernyhough, 2015). Although the coding manual permits both frequency and proportion scores, frequency scores were used in line with recommendations from recent studies (Egmose et al., 2023; Wendelboe et al., 2025), as they better reflect the quantity of mental-state input available to the child (Hughes et al., 2018). Furthermore, the frequency scores have shown comparatively stronger associations [r = 0.18, 95% CI (0.13, 0.22), p < 0.0001] with child developmental outcomes compared to proportion scores [r = 0.12 95% CI (0.09, 0.15), p < 0.0001] (Aldrich et al., 2021).

2.2.2 Parental bonding instrument (PBI)−24 months postpartum

The Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) is a 25-item questionnaire with a Likert-type response of 1–4, that captures adults' retrospective reports of perceived parenting style and parent–child bonding during the first 16 years of their life. It comprises two subscales—care (12 items) and overprotection (13 items) (Parker et al., 1979). The PBI has been validated across diverse cultural contexts and participant groups, including adolescent (Karim and Begum, 2017; Qadir et al., 2005) and perinatal populations (Fukui et al., 2022), in both Western (Wajda et al., 2022; Xu et al., 2018) and non-Western settings (Frost et al., 2024; Fukui et al., 2022; Karim and Begum, 2017). Across these cross-cultural validation studies, PBI has demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties, with good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.85–0.93 for care; α = 0.70–0.85 for overprotection) and acceptable factorial validity, although variations in factor structure (two-, three-, or four-factor models) have been supported across cultural settings (Fukui et al., 2022; Parker, 1989; Qadir et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2018).

In our study sample, the reliability analysis was conducted independently for maternal and paternal bonding reported by the participants. Cronbach's alpha for recalled maternal bonding was 0.74 for care and 0.65 for overprotection subscales. For recalled paternal bonding, the Cronbach's alpha for was 0.79 and 0.66 for care and overprotection subscales, respectively. Of note is that two items on the overprotection subscale—Item 13 (“Tended to baby me”) for both maternal and paternal subscales and Item 23 (“Was overprotective of me”) for maternal subscale—correlated negatively with the total overprotection subscale score, likely lowering the overall internal consistency of the overprotection subscale. This could reflect culturally specific experiences and interpretations wherein such behaviors of control are viewed as expressions of care rather than overprotection. This finding is consistent with previous studies on validation of the PBI in non-Western contexts, such as samples from Pakistan and Bangladesh, where social relationships and hierarchy are prioritized culturally over individual autonomy (Frost et al., 2024; Karim and Begum, 2017).

In our cohort, PBI was administered to the mothers when the index child was 2 years old, it assesses mothers' retrospective report of being parented in her own childhood. It has demonstrated strong long-term stability, with minimal influence from factors such as respondent's age, mood state or intervening life events (Wilhelm et al., 2005). To maintain conceptual consistency in the assessment of recalled parental bonding, analysis was restricted to participants who provided data on both maternal and paternal subscales. Mothers reporting care or overprotection for only one parent were excluded from the analysis. This decision was based on the conceptualization of recalled parental bonding as reflecting the cumulative and simultaneous influences from both parents. Experiences of being parented by a single parent may potentially involve unique and differential caregiving structures, expectations, relational dynamics, and thereby, experiences.

2.2.3 Indian council of medical research (ICMR) domestic violence questionnaire

Domestic violence in the first year of the post-natal period was assessed at 8 weeks, 6 months and at 1 year postpartum using the 18-item ICMR Domestic Violence Questionnaire, a semi-structured Likert-type instrument measuring psychological (13 items), physical (two items), and sexual (three items) violence experienced by the mother since childbirth and 1 year postpartum (Mahapatro et al., 2012). At each assessment, mothers were asked whether they had experienced any form of DV since the previous interview. This scale includes IPV and violence perpetrated by other adult members of the household, which is relevant in India since many women live in shared households with extended family members. For each endorsed act, respondents report contextual details including timing of onset, duration, perpetrator relationship (spouse or other members in the household), and frequency, rated on a six-point scale ranging from never to daily, allowing assessment of cumulative exposure. For this analysis, we focused on post-natal violence due to its temporal proximity to the outcome of interest, and it was dichotomized to indicate the presence (coded 1) or absence (coded 0) of any type of domestic violence (i.e., psychological, sexual, or physical) reported any time during the first year since childbirth.

2.2.4 Confounders and covariates

2.2.4.1 Maternal depression

Maternal depressive symptoms were assessed at 1 year postpartum, measured by the Edinburgh Post-natal Depression Scale (EPDS) (Cox et al., 1987). A screening cutoff of ≥10 was used to screen for clinically significant symptoms (Levis et al., 2020). Given the mixed evidence for the association of depression and MM, EPDS scores at the time of outcome reporting were adjusted for in the analyses.

2.2.4.2 Sociodemographic covariates

Based on associations reported in the literature and relevance to our cohort, key sociodemographic and perinatal variables—maternal age, maternal education (dummy coded; reference category = up to secondary education), socioeconomic status, parity (dummy coded; reference category = primiparity), and child sex (dummy coded; reference category = male sex)—were adjusted for in the analyses. Socio-economic status (SES) was assessed using the modified Kuppuswamy scale (Bairwa et al., 2013).

2.3 Statistical analysis

All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 23, with two-tailed statistical significance set at p < 0.05. Comparisons of the BCHADS cohort (n = 909) and the study subsample (n = 338) demonstrated that the study subsample was representative of the cohort in terms of key predictors and outcome variables—recalled parental bonding scores, post-natal domestic violence, infant-related mind-mindedness and maternal depression (Table 1). Bivariate analyses (Spearman's correlations) were performed to examine the correlations between sociodemographic variables, mothers' reports of recalled parental bonding, post-natal violence, maternal depression, and infant-related mind-mindedness.

Table 1. Sociodemographic profile of the BCHADS cohort and study sample.

Variable nameBCHADS cohort (n = 909)Study sample (n = 338)Comparison of study sample with rest of cohort
Mean ±SD/(n, %)Mean ±SD/(n, %)Test statistic (t/χ2)p-value
Maternal age (mean ± SD)22.90 ± 3.7023.01 ± 3.95−0.4550.656
Maternal education1.1370.286
Up to 10th standard643/906 (71.0%)225/338 (66.6%)
Above 10th standard263/906 (29.0%)113/338 (33.4%)
Socioeconomic (SES) status**0.6670.414
Lower SES69/801 (8.6%)26/338 (7.6%)
Upper lower SES355/801 (44.3%)144/338 (42.6%)
Middle SES356/801 (44.4%)161/338 (47.6%)
Higher SES21/801 (2.6%)7/338 (2.1%)
Maternal occupation3.5230.833
Homemaker777/907 (85.7%)295/338 (87.3%)
Skilled labor27/907 (3.0%)12/338 (3.6%)
Unskilled labor35/907 (3.9%)7/338 (2.1%)
Private sector38/907 (4.2%)13/338 (3.8%)
Government sector1/907 (0.1%)1/338 (0.3%)
Professional3/907 (0.3%)1/338 (0.3%)
Self-employment7/907 (0.8%)2/338 (0.6%)
Others19/907 (2.1%)7/338 (2.1%)
Parity0.020.888
Primiparous418/905 (46.2%)156/338 (46.2%)
Multiparous487/905 (53.8%)182/338 (53.8%)
Child sex0.3060.580
Male371/750 (49.5%)177/338 (52.4%)
Female379/750 (50.5%)161/338 (47.6%)

**Family income was categorized using study-specific classifications informed by Indian government poverty line definitions relevant to the data collection period (2014–2016).

The Below Poverty Line (BPL)/low SES category was defined as a monthly family income ≤ 6,000 INR, consistent with the lower income bracket during the recruitment period. For analysis, income was dummy coded, with lower and upper-lower categories combined to form the reference group (low income).

A multiple linear regression was conducted with the square root-transformed frequency of mind-minded comments as the outcome variable, adjusting for sociodemographic variables, maternal depression, and non-mental attributes coded from the FMSS (as an index of verbosity). The outcome variable was square root transformed to better approximate normality and to meet the assumptions of linear regression.

The predictor variables were entered in blocks to systematically examine their independent and incremental contributions. Infant-related mind-minded comments were regressed onto block 1 variables (maternal age, maternal education, socio-economic status, parity, maternal depression scores, child's sex, and non-mental attributes), then block 2 (maternal care and overprotection, paternal care and overprotection). The variables related to both recalled maternal and paternal care and overprotection were entered together in the same block, as recalled parental bonding was conceptualized as reflecting cumulative and simultaneous influences from both parents. Block 3 included post-natal domestic violence, and block 4 included the interaction between domestic violence and each of the parental bonding dimensions. In block 4, the interaction between domestic violence and each recalled parental bonding dimension (maternal care, maternal overprotection, paternal care, paternal overprotection) was examined individually in separate regression models.

Assumptions of linearity, normality of residuals, homoscedasticity, and multicollinearity were examined before model interpretation and were met. The Durbin–Watson statistic was 2.14, indicating that the residuals were independent. VIF values ranged from 1.02 to 4.34, indicating no significant multicollinearity among the predictors.

Results of the regression models are reported as standardized coefficients (beta) with standard errors, 95% confidence intervals, and p-values. Model fit was evaluated using adjusted R2, F-statistics reported for overall model significance, with changes in explained variance (ΔR2) examined at incremental addition of predictor variables.

3 Results

3.1 Descriptive statistics

At study recruitment, the mean maternal age was 23 years (SD 3.9); most mothers had secondary-level education or below, 66.6% (n = 225), and were homemakers, 87.3% (n = 295). The low SES and upper-lower SES groups were regrouped into low-income status, middle and high SES families were regrouped into moderate- or high-income status. Among the participants, 50.29% (n = 170) belonged to upper and upper-middle income households, and 49.71% (n = 168) belonged to low-income households, 46.2% (n = 156) of mothers were primiparous, and 52.4% (n = 177) of children were male.

The mean (SD) score for recalled maternal care was 31.50 (4.98), and the recalled maternal overprotection scores 10.96 (6.13). The mean paternal care score was 30.34 (5.99), and paternal overprotection scores averaged 11.49 (6.32). About 35.2% (119/338) of mothers reported experiencing domestic violence in the first year of childbirth, defined as any physical, psychological, or sexual violence.

The number of total utterances on the FMSS by the mother ranged from 0 to 88, the mean number of total utterances was 16.72 (12.50). Seventy five percent of the sample had 21 or fewer total utterances, with a median score of 13. The frequency of mind-minded comments observed in our sample was overall low (2.99 ± 3.41), 25% of participants provided no mental state descriptors at all, and 75% had up to four descriptors (ranging from 0–24) only. Similar findings of overall lower mind-minded comments were reported from other studies in non-Western contexts (Bozicevic et al., 2023; Chiu, 2023; Fujita and Hughes, 2021; Hughes et al., 2018).

Mean EPDS scores at 1 year postpartum were 4.00 (5.04), and 14.6% (48/338) scored above the cutoff of ≥10 on the EPDS (Levis et al., 2020). Table 2 provides descriptive summaries of predictor and outcome variables.

Table 2. Predictor and outcome variables of the BCHADS cohort and study sample.

Variable nameBCHADS cohortStudy sample N = 338Study sample medianStudy sample rangeComparison of study sample with rest of cohort test statistic
(n, %)/mean, SD(n, %)/mean, SD(t/χ2)p-value
EPDS score4.20 ± 5.37 N = 5554.00 ± 5.0420–270.3120.755
Post-natal domestic violence197/675 (29.2%)119/338 (35.2%)——2.8390.092
Parental bonding instrument scores
Maternal care31.33 ± 5.30 N = 61431.50 ± 4.98333–36−0.2880.773
Maternal overprotection11.02 ± 6.12 N = 61210.96 ± 6.12100–330.2420.809
Paternal care30.09 ± 6.30 N = 52930.34 ± 5.99323–36−0.5650.572
Paternal overprotection11.53 ± 6.44 N = 52511.49 ± 6.32110–38−0.0070.995
Mind-mindedness scores
Total utterances16.58 ± 12.0016.72 ± 12.50130–880.1100.913
Child-related utterances16.13 ± 11.1016.27 ± 11.58130–780.1100.912
Mental attributes2.94 ± 3.382.99 ± 3.4120–240.0590.953
Behavioral attributes10.41 ± 7.6810.41 ± 7.7490–520.2960.767
Physical attributes0.23 ± 0.640.23 ± 0.6200–40.3290.742
General attributes0.49 ± 0.850.50 ± 0.8800–70.0010.999
Non-mental attributes11.15 ± 7.8811.15 ± 8.0090–540.3140.754
Total attributes14.09 ± 9.8414.14 ± 0.13110–580.2690.788

3.2 Bivariate analysis

In the bivariate analysis, maternal education was weakly and positively correlated with the frequency of mental attributes, that represents infant-related MM. Maternal age, parity, socioeconomic status and child sex did not correlate with the frequency of mental attributes. The frequency of mental and non-mental attributes had moderate positive correlations. There were no significant correlations between frequency of mental attributes and dimensions of recalled parental bonding (care and overprotection), or exposure to post-natal domestic violence in the bivariate analysis. Also, maternal depression at 1 year postpartum was not significantly correlated with frequency of mental attributes. The scores of recalled maternal and paternal care demonstrated strong positive correlations, and a similar strength of association was noted for maternal and paternal overprotection scores. Furthermore, both maternal and paternal care scores demonstrated small to moderate negative correlations with their corresponding overprotection scores. Table 3 summarizes the findings of bivariate analyses.

Table 3. Bivariate correlations.

Variable12345678910111213
1. Age—
2. Education−0.016—
3. SES0.0020.117******—
4. Parity0.399******−0.075*****−0.055—
5. Child sex0.003−0.051−0.0490.022—
6. Freq. mental attributes−0.0800.160******−0.0590.010−0.059—
7. Freq. non-mental attributes−0.0650.103*****−0.0040.006−0.0080.439******—
8. PBI maternal care0.040−0.012−0.007−0.043−0.005−0.041−0.043—
9. PBI maternal overprotection−0.068−0.0770.0170.022−0.0180.029−0.025−0.284******—
10. PBI paternal care0.0510.0110.028−0.0030.037−0.073−0.136******0.747******−0.256******—
11. PBI paternal overprotection−0.038−0.0580.0190.0530.0000.0540.045−0.323******0.820******−0.398******—
12. Post-natal DV−0.100******0.0600.040−0.098*****−0.0190.029−0.033−0.0490.122******−0.096*****0.065—
13. Maternal depression (EPDS)−0.039−0.0150.035−0.008−0.0260.0350.058−0.0520.127******−0.115*****0.0600.396******—

Correlations are significant *****p < 0.05; ******p < 0.01.

3.3 Multivariate analysis

3.3.1 Does mothers' recalled parental bonding and experience of post-natal DV independently predict MM?

We fitted the linear regression model to the square root transformed outcome variable—frequency of mental attributes. After adjusting for socio-demographic covariates, maternal depressive symptoms, and total non-mental attributes (controlling for verbosity), both maternal and paternal care and overprotection scores explained 24.5% of the variance in MM. Recalled maternal care showed a trend-level positive association with mind-mindedness [β = 0.137, p = 0.065, 95% CI (−0.008, 0.282)], whereas recalled paternal care, maternal and paternal overprotection dimensions did not emerge as significant predictors (main effects) of MM. Higher maternal education [β = 0.227, p = 0.027, 95% CI (0.026, 0.427)], multiparity [β = 0.209, p = 0.042, 95% CI (0.007, 0.411)], and greater verbosity [β = 0.460, p < 0.001, 95% CI (−0.363, 0.558)] predicted a higher level of mental attributes. Lower maternal age predicted higher mind-mindedness [β = −0.111, p = 0.029, 95% CI (−0.212, 0.011)], while child sex, socio-economic status, and maternal depression did not have significant associations.

The third block included post-natal DV, as a binary variable (presence vs. absence). There were no main effects of post-natal DV in predicting MM (β = 0.034, p = 0.752). The model remained statistically significant, with no substantial change in variance explained with the addition of post-natal DV to the model (adjusted R2 = 24.3%; Table 4).

Table 4. Linear model of predictors of infant-related mind-mindedness.

ModelAdjusted R2R2 changeP value (model fit)PredictorEstimate (B)SEStd estimate (β)tp95% CI
LowerUpper
Block 10.245<0.001(Constant)0.7630.5391.4170.158
Mother's age−0.0290.013−0.111−2.1950.029−0.212−0.011
Maternal education0.2370.1060.2272.2240.0270.0260.427
Socio-economic status−0.0820.100−0.078−0.8220.412−0.2670.109
Parity0.2190.1070.2092.0420.0420.0070.411
Child sex0.1720.1000.1641.7150.087−0.0240.352
Maternal depression−0.0120.010−0.062−1.2000.231−0.1630.039
Non-mental attributes0.0600.0060.4609.330<0.0010.3630.558
Block 20.2450.009 P = 0.395< 0.001Maternal care0.0280.0150.1371.8490.065−0.0080.282
Maternal overprotection0.0160.0160.0951.0060.315−0.0910.282
Paternal care−0.0190.013−0.110−1.4150.158−0.2640.043
Paternal overprotection−0.0070.016−0.044−0.4500.653−0.2380.149
Block 30.2430.000 P = 0.752<0.001Post-natal violence0.0350.1130.0340.3170.752−0.1780.246

3.3.2 Does the presence of post-natal DV moderate the relationship between mothers' recalled parental bonding and MM?

To evaluate the moderation effect of the presence of post-natal DV on mothers' recalled parental bonding in predicting MM, the interaction variables—maternal care × DV, maternal overprotection × DV, paternal care × DV, and paternal overprotection × DV, each—were added to the above model as block 4, in separate models to assess the interaction effect individually and to minimize multicollinearity. We did not find a significant interaction effect of post-natal DV and maternal care (β = −0.053, p = 0.389), post-natal DV and maternal overprotection (β = −0.025, p = 0.672), post-natal DV and paternal care (β = −0.048, p = 0.416), as well as paternal overprotection (β = −0.012, p = 0.825) in predicting infant-related mind-mindedness. The models assessing the interaction effects are presented in the Supplementary Material (Supplementary Tables 5–8).

In conclusion, in each of the above regression models, post-natal DV did not emerge as a significant predictor of infant-related mind-mindedness. We did not find any interaction effect of post-natal DV on mothers' own parental care and overprotection in predicting MM.

A post-hoc sensitivity analysis conducted in G*Power 3.1 indicated that with a sample size of 338, 12 predictors, α = 0.05, and power = 0.80, the study was powered to detect small-to-moderate effects (f 2 = 0.05) in the regression models. For interaction analysis, the study was powered to detect small incremental effects (f 2 = 0.023).

4 Discussion

Our findings contribute to the limited body of literature on the impact of relational influences on early caregiving, specifically maternal mind-mindedness regarding the infant, within the non-Western Indian context (McMahon and Bernier, 2017). Recalled maternal and paternal care, and overprotection, and experiences of DV in the post-natal period did not independently predict infant-related MM using conventional indicators of statistical significance. However, maternal recalled care emerged as a predictor at a trend level of significance, warranting cautious interpretation. This finding, therefore, requires replication and may be due in part to the comparatively low levels of MM observed in Indian mothers (Bozicevic et al., 2023), and therefore requires further examination in larger and more diverse samples. The potential implications of this finding are discussed in detail below. Contrary to our prediction of an interaction between DV and recalled parental bonding, we did not find significant interaction effects in our study.

Maternal recalled experiences of high care predicted a marginal increase in mothers' MM (β = 0.137, p = 0.065), at a trend level of significance after controlling for sociodemographic covariates and verbosity. Although modest, the observed association suggests that mother's early relational experiences may shape their capacity to interpret and respond to their infant's mental states, but the study provides only tentative support for intergenerational transmission of parenting. While the magnitude of this association is small—as is typical for complex, multi-determined longitudinal developmental processes—it suggests that direct clinical applications should be approached with caution until these findings are replicated. Positive associations have been noted between the attachment state of mind and MM among Canadian mothers (Demers et al., 2010). Also, in a UK-based study, Bourne et al. (2014) reported psychological mindedness, the capacity to reflect on one's own and others' thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, was positively associated with recalled maternal care and negatively associated with recalled paternal overprotection, assessed on PBI (Bourne et al., 2014). However, a few studies have reported a null association between mothers' recalled parental bonding and MM (Chiu, 2023; Milligan et al., 2015).

Cultural variation in the expression of mind-mindedness has been proposed as one possible explanation for these inconsistent findings (Chiu, 2023), and we discuss this further later in our discussion. We must also consider whether the PBI is valid across different cultural settings. Although not systematically validated in the Indian population, the mean recalled parental bonding scores in our study were broadly comparable to those reported by other Indian studies who, like us, retained the original 2-factor structure proposed by Parker and colleagues (Singh and Manjula, 2018; Singh et al., 2021). Further, another South Asian study in Pakistan, reported similar levels of recalled care and over-protection at 2 years postpartum; mean maternal care was 32.9 (SD 4.6) and mean maternal overprotection was 19.7 (SD 5.7) (Frost et al., 2024). The fact that across these studies suboptimal parenting scores on the PBI have shown expected associations with anxiety and depressive disorders that are consistent with international findings, supports the construct validity of PBI in cross-cultural contexts (Kidd et al., 2022). Future research should seek to validate the PBI in the Indian context to better capture cultural nuances and to examine the replicability of these findings.

Domestic violence is a major perinatal stressor and a traumatic relational experience, with strong evidence linking it to adverse maternal and child outcomes (Kim et al., 2024; White et al., 2024). Preliminary links between maternal trauma histories and disruptions in parental reflective functioning suggest that difficulties in mentalizing past traumatic experiences may interfere with the capacity for adequate reflection and caregiving (Camoirano, 2017). Although in our sample, 35.2% of mothers reported DV in the first year postpartum, we did not find evidence for main and interaction effects of post-natal DV in predicting MM. Despite the sample size being adequate to detect very small moderation effects, it is plausible that the overall lower mean of MM in the study sample could have obscured the detection of main and interaction effects, if any. This hypothesis could be further tested in Western samples where higher levels of MM are consistently demonstrated, as well as in diverse Indian samples.

Consistent with other studies from non-Western settings, the overall frequency of mind-minded comments in our sample was lower than typically reported in Western cohorts. Comparable findings have been reported in Hong Kong (9.03 ± 5.60) (Hughes et al., 2018), Chinese (5.07 ± 5.60) (Dai et al., 2020), and Indian samples (1.99 ± 2.48) (Bozicevic et al., 2023). In contrast, investigations from Western contexts often demonstrate substantially higher levels, with reports from Australian (12.47 ± 9.91) (Dai et al., 2020), and British samples (13.18 ± 5.74) (Hughes et al., 2018), (5.94 ± 3.092) (Bozicevic et al., 2023). Importantly, this pattern appears consistent across both representational (Fujita and Hughes, 2021; Hughes et al., 2018) and interactional approaches (Bozicevic et al., 2023; Dai et al., 2020) to assessing MM. Further, in our study, mothers who provided more elaborate descriptions of their child in the FMSS were more likely to be mind-minded, since overall verbosity was a strong predictor of MM. Given the relatively small evidence base from non-Western settings, these findings highlight the need for future studies to consider socio-demographic composition, recruitment context, assessment method, and cultural norms shaping verbal expression about children, which may influence observed levels of mind-mindedness across studies.

Amongst the covariates examined in our study and in line with some previous work, we found maternal education predicted higher MM, possibly influenced by maternal linguistic and cognitive capabilities (Meins et al., 2001, 2003; Rosenblum et al., 2008), although this association has not been consistently reported (Arnott and Meins, 2008; Meins et al., 2012). Consistent with a few other studies, socio-economic status did not emerge as a significant predictor (Lundy, 2013; Meins et al., 2013). Multiparity predicted higher mind-mindedness, possibly reflecting cumulative and incremental parenting experience gained with parenting multiple children, however, most studies have not examined this relationship directly (Hill and McMahon, 2016). Contrary to studies from Western contexts, which frequently report higher mind-mindedness in older mothers (Camberis et al., 2016; Demers et al., 2010), younger maternal age predicted higher MM in our study (β = −0.111, p = 0.029). This divergence may reflect rapid ecocultural and generational shifts within urban India, and greater exposure to Western parenting paradigms through digital media and globalized discourse. Viewed through Kagitcibasi's (2005) model of ‘autonomous-relatedness', younger generations may be integrating globalized, individualistic concepts of the child's mind into their caregiving ethnotheories faster than older generations, who may remain more rooted in traditional, hierarchical, and action-oriented caregiving norms (Kagitcibasi, 2005; Lansford, 2022). However, we have not specifically assessed for these influences in our study. Finally, child sex did not predict MM, consistent with existing literature (McMahon and Meins, 2012; Meins et al., 2013).

4.1 The role of culture and limitations to assessment approaches

While mind-mindedness as a construct is conceptualized and researched within the western context, it is important to interpret it from a culturally-anchored perspective when applied to non-Western caregiving environments. Lansford (2022) posits that, in different cultures, parents value different aspects of parenting, and their parenting behaviors may have different forms and functions consistent with their socialization goals within their respective cultures (Lansford, 2022). In a related framework, Kagitcibasi's (2005) model conceptualizes caregiving along dimensions of interpersonal distance and agency, distinguishing between autonomy-oriented individualistic cultures and relatedness-oriented collectivistic cultures, with the autonomous-related model representing a blend of both (Kagitcibasi, 2005).

Research suggests that cultural differences shape how caregiving behaviors are expressed and understood. For instance, warmth and high care can coexist with high overprotection, and that behaviors perceived as controlling may, within certain cultural contexts, be experienced as expressions of care and involvement in others, with care potentially buffering any negative effects of overprotection. In our previous work, Indian mothers were found to issue more instructions and controlling comments compared to UK mothers (Bozicevic et al., 2023). Similarly, Chiu (2023) posit that mothers may be attuned to their children's mental states but choose not to verbalize them, instead focusing on culturally valued traits, such as obedience, respect for elders, and conformity to parents' directives as well as self-control (Balda et al., 2001; Chiu, 2023). Likewise, Dai et al. (2020) in a cross cultural comparison, proposed that differences in child-directed speech should not be interpreted as evidence of lower parental attunement, but rather as reflecting differences in how such attunement is expressed. Mind-mindedness, particularly when only assessed using verbal comments, however, places explicit emphasis on recognizing the child as an individual with an autonomous mind, with intentions, and agency. The extent to which such internal states are made explicit in everyday discourse is therefore likely to vary across linguistic and cultural contexts; suggesting differences in observed levels of MM warrant cautious interpretation (Dai et al., 2020). These cultural variations raise fundamental questions about the ‘universality of the mind-mindedness' construct as assessed currently.

While this study adopts a well-established representational approach to assess maternal mind-mindedness, several methodological factors should be considered. The validity of MM measures across developmental stages remains an area of ongoing research. While observational measures are widely used in infant populations, interview-based representational measures are commonly employed in toddlers and older children (McMahon and Bernier, 2017) rather than in infants. However, recent research has begun to demonstrate the reliability and validity of representational measures in infant populations (Egmose et al., 2023). Debate persists regarding the superiority of MM measurement approaches; interview-based representational methods are more practical, whereas observational methods offer accuracy in assessing the appropriateness of mind-related comments in a real-time interaction with the child and capture the interactive aspects of maternal responsiveness. Concordance between these two approaches is generally modest, and whether they assess the same underlying construct remains a subject of ongoing investigation (McMahon and Bernier, 2017). On the other hand, Bernier and Dozier (2003) suggest that attributing complex mental states to very young children could reflect a lack of attunement to the child's actual developmental level (Bernier and Dozier, 2003).

Further, the fact that the current MM coding systems focus on verbal expressions of mind-related comments might be viewed as a limitation, particularly in cultures where verbalizing thoughts and feelings is discouraged or not commonly practiced. So, in this context, the lack of prediction from the recalled parental bonding dimensions assessed on PBI and the absence of a moderating effect of domestic violence in our study should not necessarily be viewed as a failure of the hypotheses, but rather as a critical conceptual finding. These null results raise a vital question: does representational mind-mindedness, as measured by the verbalization of mental states here, adequately capture this domain of caregiving in an Indian context? The findings may reflect measurement limitations of the verbally based representational MM approach in this cultural context rather than a true absence of underlying mentalizing or caregiving processes. The developmental significance of parental mind-mindedness for child development, and its antecedents, may be universal or alternatively, may vary across cultural contexts. However, our current measurement approaches limit our ability to fully test these hypotheses due to their reliance on verbal expression of internal state language alone, which itself varies across cultures. In line with this, there is recent emphasis on the need to investigate non-verbal mind-mindedness in parent-infant interactions, explore broader perspectives like Parental Embodied Mentalisation (PEM), the integration of multisensory bodily signals to understand one's own and others' mental states (Aras et al., 2024; Bigelow, 2025).

4.2 Strengths and limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first study in South Asia to examine the association between recalled parental care and mind-mindedness among parents of young infants. Furthermore, it is the first South Asian study to examine the association between domestic violence and mind-mindedness, and the first study globally to investigate the moderating effect of domestic violence on the relationship between recalled care and mind-mindedness. By extending research beyond Western contexts, the study contributes important culturally grounded insights to the evidence base that has been predominantly shaped by Western-centric research. Strengths include the large sample of 338 mothers, longitudinal study design, and systematic assessment of mind-mindedness through standardized methodologies, enabling examination of early and current relational influences on caregiving representations. Grounded in theory, the study findings provide only tentative support for intergenerational transmission of parenting. While the observed association is modest, even small effect sizes can have meaningful cumulative significance at a population level; if replicated, and this finding may support the systematic assessment of maternal recalled parenting experiences in interventions aimed at enhancing parent-infant relationships.

The findings should be interpreted considering the following limitations. First, we used representational measure of the MM, which captured only maternal verbal behaviors which occurred relatively infrequently in our sample. As discussed above, this approach may not fully capture interactional or non-verbal aspects of parental mentalising, particularly across different cultural contexts. Second, exposure to violence in the post-natal period was considered as a categorical predictor, assessed as a binary presence–absence variable, and did not include frequency, chronicity, severity of violence and perpetrator characteristics. This binary classification may have obscured important variation in exposures and reduced statistical power to detect meaningful associations. For instance, the impact of chronic or severe violence may differ from isolated episodes, and violence perpetrated by a spouse may have different implications for maternal mentalizing than violence involving other family members. The absence of an interaction between the presence of domestic violence and recalled care in the prediction of maternal mind-mindedness may reflect the relatively infrequent use of mind-mindedness comments in the sample. Although domestic violence was comprehensively assessed, future studies could examine more nuanced dimensions of domestic violence exposure which may better capture the impact of domestic violence on maternal mind-mindedness than exposure alone. Future research could benefit from incorporating qualitative approaches to complement quantitative findings and provide richer context for understanding these relationships. Finally, our study examined a prospective association between mothers' past experience of parental bonding, post-natal DV, and MM at 1 year postpartum; nevertheless, causal inferences cannot be made.

4.3 Conclusion and future directions

Recalled maternal and paternal care, and overprotection, and experiences of DV in the post-natal period did not independently predict infant-related MM using conventional indicators of statistical significance. Further, the study findings provide only tentative support for intergenerational transmission of parenting, with a marginal trend suggesting a modest association of high recalled maternal care and higher levels of infant-related MM among urban Indian women. These findings require replication and provide a foundation for future work, ideally incorporating both real-time interactional observations and non-verbal measures of mentalisation to fully capture how attunement to infant signals is expressed in this cultural context. Studies should also evaluate its relative contribution to variations in caregiving across cultures and assess prospective associations with key child development outcomes in such settings. Together, these insights underscore the need for culturally sensitive, contextually grounded, and developmentally informed approaches to studying maternal mind-mindedness, with the ultimate goal of supporting maternal and child wellbeing.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdpys.2026.1838099/full#supplementary-material

Supplementary material Supplementary material at the source

Footnotes

Edited by: Maria Licata-Dandel, Charlotte Fresenius Hochschule, Germany

Reviewed by: Rooplekha Khuntia, National Institute of Science Education and Research (NISER), India

Siti Nursanti, Universitas Singaperbangsa Karawang, Indonesia

Statements

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. BCHADS was jointly funded by the UK Medical Research Council and the Indian Council of Medical Research (Grants MR/N000870/1 and ICMR/MRC/2/M/2015-NCD-1) awarded to HS AND PC.

Data availability

The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because of ethical constraints. Anonymised summary data may be made available to bona fide researchers on approval of an application for access. However, we do welcome formal approved collaborations for the analysis of data. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to hmsharp@liverpool.ac.uk.

Ethics approval

The studies involving humans were approved by National Institute for Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS) Ethics Committee on 2nd July 2015 and by the University of Liverpool Ethics Committee on 1st March 2016. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

MB: Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. HM: Formal analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. TS: Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. LB: Project administration, Writing – review & editing. HS: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. PC: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the families for their involvement in this study and the team of research assistants who helped to gather data.

References

  1. Aldrich N. J., Chen J., Alfieri L. (2021). Evaluating associations between parental mind-mindedness and children's developmental capacities through meta-analysis. Develop. Rev. 60: 100946. doi: doi:10.1016/j.dr.2021.100946
  2. Aras A., Fonagy P., Campbell C., Rosan C. (2024). What do we know about parental embodied mentalizing? A systematic review of the construct, assessment, empirical findings, gaps and further steps. Attach. Human Develop. 26, 588 – 624. doi: doi:10.1080/14616734.2024.2421432
  3. Arnott B., Meins E. (2007). Links among antenatal attachment representations, postnatal mind–mindedness, and infant attachment security: a preliminary study of mothers and fathers. Bullet. Menninger Clinic 71, 132 – 149. doi: doi:10.1521/bumc.2007.71.2.132
  4. Arnott B., Meins E. (2008). Continuity in mind-mindedness from pregnancy to the first year of life. Infant Behav. Develop. 31, 647 – 654. doi: doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2008.07.001
  5. Assen N. N. (2023). The Role of Contextual, Personal, and/or Parenting-Related Factors in Individual. Groningen: University of Groningen, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences.
  6. Bairwa M., Rajput M., Sachdeva S. (2013). Modified kuppuswamy′s socioeconomic scale: social researcher should include updated income criteria, 2012. Indian J. Commun. Med. 38: 185. doi: doi:10.4103/0970-0218.116358
  7. Balda S., Irving K., Berthelsen D., Catherwood D. (2001). Parental control and style in Australia and India: a cross-cultural study. J. Human Ecol. 12, 133 – 139. doi: doi:10.1080/09709274.2001.11907593
  8. Bernier A., Dozier M. (2003). Bridging the attachment transmission gap: the role of maternal mind-mindedness. Internat. J. Behav. Develop. 27, 355 – 365. doi: doi:10.1080/01650250244000399
  9. Bigelow A. E. (2025). Call for non-verbal mind-mindedness measures for use in infancy and across cultures. Child Develop. Perspect. 12544. doi: doi:10.1111/cdep.12544
  10. Bigelow A. E., Beebe B., Power M., Stafford A.-L., Ewing J., Egleson A.. (2018). Longitudinal relations among maternal depressive symptoms, maternal mind-mindedness, and infant attachment behavior. Infant Behav. Develop. 51, 33 – 44. doi: doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2018.02.006
  11. Bogat G. A., Levendosky A. A., Cochran K. (2023). Developmental consequences of intimate partner violence on children. Annual Rev. Clin. Psychol. 19, 303 – 329. doi: doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-072720-013634
  12. Bourne K., Berry K., Jones L. (2014). The relationships between psychological mindedness, parental bonding and adult attachment. Psychol. Psychother.: Theory, Res. Pract. 87, 167 – 177. doi: doi:10.1111/papt.12007
  13. Bowlby J. (1982). Attachment and loss: retrospect and prospect. Am. J. Orthopsych. 52, 664 – 678. doi: doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb01456.x
  14. Bozicevic L., Hill J., Chandra P. S., Omirou A., Holla C., Wright N.. (2023). Cross-cultural differences in early caregiving: levels of mind-mindedness and instruction in UK and India. Front. Child Adolesc. Psychiatr. 2: 1124883. doi: doi:10.3389/frcha.2023.1124883
  15. Camberis A.-L., McMahon C. A., Gibson F. L., Boivin J. (2016). Maternal age, psychological maturity, parenting cognitions, and mother–infant interaction. Infancy 21, 396 – 422. doi: doi:10.1111/infa.12116
  16. Camoirano A. (2017). Mentalizing makes parenting work: a review about parental reflective functioning and clinical interventions to improve it. Front. Psychol. 8: 14. doi: doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00014
  17. Chiu C.-H. (2023). Caregivers' Inclination to See Their Children as Psychological Agents and its Antecedents: A Cross-Cultural Study of Parental Bonding, Reflective Functioning, and Maternal Mind-Mindedness. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University.
  18. Cox J. L., Holden J. M., Sagovsky R. (1987). Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item edinburgh postnatal depression scale. British J. Psychiatr.: J. Mental Sci. 150, 782 – 786. doi: doi:10.1192/bjp.150.6.782
  19. Dai Q., McMahon C., Lim A. K. (2020). Cross-cultural comparison of maternal mind-mindedness among Australian and Chinese mothers. Internat. J. Behav. Develop. 44, 365 – 370. doi: doi:10.1177/0165025419874133
  20. Demers I., Bernier A., Tarabulsy G. M., Provost M. A. (2010). Maternal and child characteristics as antecedents of maternal mind-mindedness. Infant Mental Health J. 31, 94 – 112. doi: doi:10.1002/imhj.20244
  21. Easterbrooks M. A., Crossman M. K., Caruso A., Raskin M., Miranda-Julian C. (2017). Maternal mind–mindedness and toddler behavior problems: the moderating role of maternal trauma and posttraumatic stress. Develop. Psychopathol. 29, 1431 – 1442. doi: doi:10.1017/S0954579417000360
  22. Egmose I., Skou M., Madsen E. B., Stuart A. C., Krogh M. T., Haase T. W.. (2023). Reliability and validity of representational mind-mindedness in mothers of infants. Eur. J. Develop. Psychol. 20, 889 – 902. doi: doi:10.1080/17405629.2023.2209714
  23. Elmadih A., Abumadini M. (2019). Epigenetic transmission of maternal behavior: impact on the neurobiological system of healthy mothers. Saudi J. Med. Med. Sci. 7, 3 – 8. doi: doi:10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_163_17
  24. Farrow C., Blissett J. (2014). Maternal mind-mindedness during infancy, general parenting sensitivity and observed child feeding behavior: a longitudinal study. Attach. Human Develop. 16, 230 – 241. doi: doi:10.1080/14616734.2014.898158
  25. Fearon R. P., Bakermans-Kranenburg M. J., Van IJzendoorn M. H., Lapsley A.-M., Roisman G. I. (2010). The significance of insecure attachment and disorganization in the development of children's externalizing behavior: a meta-analytic study. Child Develop. 81, 435 – 456. doi: doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01405.x
  26. Frost A., Hagaman A., Bibi A., Bhalotra S., Chung E. O., Haight S. C.. (2024). Childhood parental bonding and depression in adulthood: a study of mothers in rural Pakistan. J. Affect. Disord. 356, 715 – 721. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jad.2024.04.090
  27. Fujita N., Hughes C. (2021). Mind-mindedness and self–other distinction: Contrasts between Japanese and British mothers' speech samples. Social Develop. 30, 57 – 72. doi: doi:10.1111/sode.12454
  28. Fukui N., Watanabe Y., Hashijiri K., Motegi T., Ogawa M., Egawa J.. (2022). Factor structure of the parental bonding instrument for pregnant Japanese women. Sci. Rep. 12: 19071. doi: doi:10.1038/s41598-022-22017-2
  29. Georg A. K., Meyerhöfer S., Taubner S., Volkert J. (2023). Is parental depression related to parental mentalizing? A systematic review and three-level meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 104: 102322. doi: doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102322
  30. George C., Main M., Kaplan N. (2003). Adult attachment scoring and classification system. Berkeley: University of California.
  31. Gervai J. (2009). Environmental and genetic influences on early attachment. Child Adolesc. Psychiatr. Mental Health 3: 25. doi: doi:10.1186/1753-2000-3-25
  32. Hill S., McMahon C. (2016). Maternal mind-mindedness: stability across relationships and associations with attachment style and psychological mindedness. Infant Child Develop. 25, 391 – 405. doi: doi:10.1002/icd.1947
  33. Hughes C., Devine R. T., Wang Z. (2018). Does parental mind-mindedness account for cross-cultural differences in preschoolers' theory of mind? Child Develop. 89, 1296 – 1310. doi: doi:10.1111/cdev.12746
  34. Illingworth G., MacLean M., Wiggs L. (2016). Maternal mind-mindedness: Stability over time and consistency across relationships. European J. Develop. Psychol. 13, 488 – 503. doi: doi:10.1080/17405629.2015.1115342
  35. Kagitcibasi C. (2005). Autonomy and relatedness in cultural context: implications for self and family. J. Cross-Cultural Psychol. 36, 403 – 422. doi: doi:10.1177/0022022105275959
  36. Karim A. K. M. R., Begum T. (2017). The parental bonding instrument: a psychometric measure to assess parenting practices in the homes in Bangladesh. Asian J. Psychiat. 25, 231–239. doi: doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2016.11.004
  37. Kidd K. N., Prasad D., Cunningham J. E. A., De Azevedo Cardoso T., Frey B. N. (2022). The relationship between parental bonding and mood, anxiety and related disorders in adulthood: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 307, 221 – 236. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.03.069
  38. Kim J.-Y., Zhang L., Gruber A. M., Kim S. K., Holmes M. R., Brevda A. (2024). Prenatal exposure to intimate partner violence and child developmental outcomes: a scoping review study. Traum. Viol. Abuse 25, 2249 – 2263. doi: doi:10.1177/15248380231209434
  39. Lansford J. E. (2022). Annual research review: cross-cultural similarities and differences in parenting. J. Child Psychol. Psychiat. 63, 466 – 479. doi: doi:10.1111/jcpp.13539
  40. Laranjo J., Bernier A., Meins E. (2008). Associations between maternal mind-mindedness and infant attachment security: investigating the mediating role of maternal sensitivity. Infant Behav. Develop. 31, 688 – 695. doi: doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2008.04.008
  41. Levis B., Negeri Z., Sun Y., Benedetti A., Thombs B. D. (2020). Accuracy of the edinburgh postnatal depression scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. BMJ 371: m4022. doi: doi:10.1136/bmj.m4022
  42. Lundy B. L. (2013). Paternal and maternal mind-mindedness and preschoolers' theory of mind: the mediating role of interactional attunement. Soc. Develop. 22, 58 – 74. doi: doi:10.1111/sode.12009
  43. Madden V., Domoney J., Aumayer K., Sethna V., Iles J., Hubbard I.. (2015). Intergenerational transmission of parenting: Findings from a UK longitudinal study. European Journal of Public Health 25, 1030 – 1035. doi: doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv093
  44. Mahapatro M., Gupta R., Gupta V. (2012). The risk factor of domestic violence in India. Indian J. Community Med.: Official Publ. Indian Assoc. Prev. Soc. Med. 37, 153 – 157. doi: doi:10.4103/0970-0218.99912
  45. Marcoux A.-A., Bernier A., Séguin J. R., Boike Armerding J., Lyons-Ruth K. (2017). How do mothers with borderline personality disorder mentalize when interacting with their infants? Personal. Mental Health 11, 14 – 22. doi: doi:10.1002/pmh.1362
  46. McMahon C. A., Bernier A. (2017). Twenty years of research on parental mind-mindedness: Empirical findings, theoretical and methodological challenges, and new directions. Develop. Rev. 46, 54 – 80. doi: doi:10.1016/j.dr.2017.07.001
  47. McMahon C. A., Meins E. (2012). Mind-mindedness, parenting stress, and emotional availability in mothers of preschoolers. Early Child. Res. Quarterl. 27, 245 – 252. doi: doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.08.002
  48. Meins E. (1999). Sensitivity, security and internal working models: bridging the transmission gap. Attach. Human Develop. 1, 325 – 342. doi: doi:10.1080/14616739900134181
  49. Meins E., Centifanti L. C. M., Fernyhough C., Fishburn S. (2013). Maternal mind-mindedness and children's behavioral difficulties: mitigating the impact of low socioeconomic status. J. Abnor. Child Psychol. 41, 543 – 553. doi: doi:10.1007/s10802-012-9699-3
  50. Meins E., Fernyhough C. (2015). Mind-mindedness coding manual. Version 2.2. Unpublished Manuscript. York: University of York.
  51. Meins E., Fernyhough C., De Rosnay M., Arnott B., Leekam S. R., Turner M. (2012). Mind-mindedness as a multidimensional construct: appropriate and nonattuned mind-related comments independently predict infant–mother attachment in a socially diverse sample. Infancy 17, 393 – 415. doi: doi:10.1111/j.1532-7078.2011.00087.x
  52. Meins E., Fernyhough C., Fradley E., Tuckey M. (2001). Rethinking maternal sensitivity: mothers' comments on infants' mental processes predict security of attachment at 12 months. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatr. 42, 637 – 648. doi: doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00759
  53. Meins E., Fernyhough C., Harris-Waller J. (2014). Is mind-mindedness trait-like or a quality of close relationships? Evidence from descriptions of significant others, famous people, and works of art. Cognition 130, 417 – 427. doi: doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.009
  54. Meins E., Fernyhough C., Wainwright R., Clark-Carter D., Das Gupta M., Fradley E.. (2003). Pathways to understanding mind: construct validity and predictive validity of maternal mind-mindedness. Child Development 74, 1194 – 1211. doi: doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00601
  55. Milligan K., Khoury J. E., Benoit D., Atkinson L. (2015). Maternal attachment and mind-mindedness: the role of emotional specificity. Attach. Human Develop. 17, 302 – 318. doi: doi:10.1080/14616734.2014.996573
  56. Mishra S. K., Pradhan G., Pradhan S. K., Choubey G. (2024). Prevalence and predictors of domestic violence in india: complex sample analysis of a nationally representative study conducted between 2019 and 2021. Cureus 16: e66113. doi: doi:10.7759/cureus.66113
  57. Parker G. (1989). The parental bonding instrument: psychometric properties reviewed. Psychiatr. Develop. 7, 317 – 335.
  58. Parker G. (1990). The parental bonding instrument: a decade of research. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 25, 281 – 282. doi: doi:10.1007/BF00782881
  59. Parker G., Tupling H., Brown L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. British J. Med. Psychol. 52, 1 – 10. doi: doi:10.1111/j.2044-8341.1979.tb02487.x
  60. Qadir F., Stewart R., Khan M., Prince M. (2005). The validity of the parental bonding instrument as a measure of maternal bonding among young Pakistani women. Soc. Psychiatr. Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 40, 276 – 282. doi: doi:10.1007/s00127-005-0887-0
  61. Reese E., Meins E., Fernyhough C., Centifanti L. (2019). Origins of mother–child reminiscing style. Develop. Psychopathol. 31, 631 – 642. doi: doi:10.1017/S0954579418000172
  62. Riggs S. A. (2010). Childhood emotional abuse and the attachment system across the life cycle: what theory and research tell us. J. Aggr. Maltreat. Trauma 19, 5 – 51. doi: doi:10.1080/10926770903475968
  63. Román-Gálvez R. M., Martín-Peláez S., Fernández-Félix B. M., Zamora J., Khan K. S., Bueno-Cavanillas A. (2021). Worldwide prevalence of intimate partner violence in pregnancy. a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Public Health 9: 738459. doi: doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.738459
  64. Rosenblum K. L., McDonough S. C., Sameroff A. J., Muzik M. (2008). Reflection in thought and action: maternal parenting reflectivity predicts mind-minded comments and interactive behavior. Infant Mental Health J. 29, 362 – 376. doi: doi:10.1002/imhj.20184
  65. Rothenberg W. A., Lansford J. E., Uribe Tirado L. M., Yotanyamaneewong S., Peña Alampay L., Al-Hassan S. M.. (2023). The intergenerational transmission of maladaptive parenting and its impact on child mental health: examining cross-cultural mediating pathways and moderating protective factors. Child Psychiatr. Human Develop. 54, 870 – 890. doi: doi:10.1007/s10578-021-01311-6
  66. Schacht R., Hammond L., Marks M., Wood B., Conroy S. (2013). The relation between mind-mindedness in mothers with borderline personality disorder and mental state understanding in their children. Infant Child Develop. 22, 68 – 84. doi: doi:10.1002/icd.1766
  67. Schacht R., Meins E., Fernyhough C., Centifanti L. C. M., Bureau J.-F., Pawlby S. (2017). Proof of concept of a mind–mindedness intervention for mothers hospitalized for severe mental illness. Develop. Psychopathol. 29, 555 – 564. doi: doi:10.1017/S0954579417000177
  68. Sher-Censor E. (2015). Five Minute speech sample in developmental research: a review. Develop. Rev. 36, 127 – 155. doi: doi:10.1016/j.dr.2015.01.005
  69. Singh A., Manjula M. (2018). Early trauma experiences, parenting styles, and personality patterns in individuals with depression from India. Internat. J. Cult. Mental Health 11, 146 – 156. doi: doi:10.1080/17542863.2017.1342677
  70. Singh V. K., Khess C. R. J., Bhattacharjee D., Singh N. K. (2021). Parental bonding among individuals with recurrent depressive disorder, anxiety disorder and healthy controls. Indian J. Psychiatric Social Work 32–36. doi: doi:10.29120/ijpsw.2021.v12.i1.214
  71. Slade A. (2005). Parental reflective functioning: an introduction. Attach. Human Develop. 7, 269 – 281. doi: doi:10.1080/14616730500245906
  72. Solomon J., George C. (2006). “Intergenerational transmission of dysregulated maternal caregiving: mothers describe their upbringing and childrearing,” in Parenting representations: Theory, RESEARCH, and Clinical Implications (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press), 265 – 295.
  73. Tharner A., Altman F. H., Væver M. (2016). Fathers' perceptions of caregiving in childhood and current mentalizing with their preschool children. Nordic Psychol. 68, 176 – 193. doi: doi:10.1080/19012276.2015.1125302
  74. van IJzendoorn M. H. (1995). Adult attachment representations, parental responsiveness, and infant attachment: a meta-analysis on the predictive validity of the adult attachment interview. Psychol. Bulletin 117, 387 – 403. doi: doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.387
  75. van IJzendoorn M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg M. J. (2019). Bridges across the intergenerational transmission of attachment gap. Cur. Opin. Psychol. Attachment Adul. 25, 31 – 36. doi: doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.02.014
  76. Vygotsky L. S., Cole M. (1978). Mind in society: development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  77. Wajda Z., Izydorczyk B., Sitnik-Warchulska K., Lizińczyk S., Lickiewicz J. (2022). Factor structure and psychometric properties of polish version of parental bonding Instrument (PBI) among adults and adolescents. PLoS ONE 17: e0272617. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0272617
  78. Wendelboe K. I., Stuart A. C., Frees A., Egmose I., Mohr J. E., Væver M. S.. (2025). Mentalizing care: adult attachment and structural factors as predictors of representational mind-mindedness in early child-care professionals. Scand. J. Psychol. 66, 266 – 276. doi: doi:10.1111/sjop.13083
  79. White S., Bearne L., Sweeney A., Mantovani N. (2024). Examining the measurement of severity of intimate partner violence and its association to mental health outcomes: a narrative synthesis. Front. Public Health 12: 1450680. doi: doi:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1450680
  80. Widom C. S., Czaja S. J., Dutton M. A. (2008). Childhood victimization and lifetime revictimization. Child Abuse and Neglect 32, 785 – 796. doi: doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.12.006
  81. Wilhelm K., Niven H., Parker G., Hadzi-Pavlovic D. (2005). The stability of the Parental Bonding Instrument over a 20-year period. Psychol. Med. 35, 387 – 393. doi: doi:10.1017/S0033291704003538
  82. World Health Organization (2012). Understanding and addressing violence against women: overview (WHO/RHR/12.35). Geneva: World Health Organization. Available online at: (Accessed June 27, 2026).
  83. Xu M. K., Morin A. J. S., Marsh H. W., Richards M., Jones P. B. (2018). Psychometric validation of the parental bonding instrument in a U.K. population–based sample: role of gender and association with mental health in mid-late life. Assessment 25, 716 – 728. doi: doi:10.1177/1073191116660813
  84. Zeegers M. A. J., Colonnesi C., Stams G.-J. J. M., Meins E. (2017). Mind matters: a meta-analysis on parental mentalization and sensitivity as predictors of infant-parent attachment. Psychol. Bulletin 143, 1245 – 1272. doi: doi:10.1037/bul0000114
  85. Zitzmann J., Georg A., Rosenbach C., Renneberg B. (2025). “If I could read your mind…”: parental mentalizing in mothers with borderline personality disorder. Borderline Personal. Disord. Emotion Dysregul. 12: 20. doi: doi:10.1186/s40479-025-00290-7

Citation

Bhide, M., et al. (2026). The relationship between recalled parental care, domestic violence, and infant-related mind-mindedness among mothers in urban India. Frontiers in Developmental Psychology, Volume 4. https://doi.org/
Received
Accepted
Published
Volume
4 - 2026

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Bhide, Manohar, Supraja, Bozicevic, Sharp and Chandra.

License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

*Correspondence: Helen Sharp

Article metrics

Views
0
Downloads
0
Citations
0
Shares
0

Related articles

PerspectiveFriluftsliv (open-air life) as a cultural site of emotion socialization in early childhood in NorwayEvi Petersen, Natália Meireles Santos da Costa, Tuva Beyer BrochReviewScreen exposure and cognitive outcomes in school-aged children and adolescents: a narrative review through the lens of Cognitive Load TheoryHiya Al Kalbani, Erin Kitt-LewisBrief Research ReportShort-term familiarity shapes social preference but not word learning in preschoolersJina Ahn, Erica A. Cartmill, Catherine M. Sandhofer