Home Visitor Relationship Security: Association With Perceptions of Work, Satisfaction, and Turnover

Abstract

Home visiting is widely used to improve outcomes in families at risk for poor parenting. Impact is modest and variable, owing in part to poor fidelity. Attachment theory suggests that home visitors' relationship security influences fidelity because establishing a trusting relationship with parents is central to service delivery. This study describes paraprofessional home visitors' relationship security and relates it to demographics, psychological attributes, and work perceptions and intentions. Home visitors (n = 62) varied widely on the two major domains of relationship security: anxiety and avoidance. Relationship security was stable over time. Relationship anxiety and avoidance were associated with psychological and work constructs in theoretically predicted ways. Relationship anxiety was negatively associated with self-efficacy and positively associated with negative affect and indicators of burnout. Relationship avoidance was negatively associated with self-efficacy, job satisfaction, and tenure as a home visitor. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Home visitors
• family support program
• attachment
• relationship security
• burnout
• job satisfaction
• early intervention

View correction statement:

ERRATUM

Notes

This work was supported in part by the National Institute for Mental Health (Grant P30MH38725); the Federal Maternal and Child Health Bureau (Grant R40 MC 00029, formerly Grant MCJ-240637, and Grant R40 MC 00123, formerly Grant MCJ-240838); the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Grant 18303); the Annie E. Casey Foundation (Grant 94–4041); the David and Lucile Packard Foundation (Grants 93–6051, 94–7957, 97–8058, and 98–3448) and the Hawaii State Department of Health (Grant 99-29-J).

^aPossible range is 10–50; high scores are favorable.

^bPossible range is 10–50; high scores indicate distress.

^cMean self-efficacy score. Possible range is 0–10; high scores are favorable.

^dPossible range is 0–48; high scores are favorable.

^ePossible range is 0–54; high scores are unfavorable.

^fPossible range is 0–30; high scores are unfavorable.

^gMean job satisfaction score. Possible range is 0–10; high scores are favorable.

^h n = 48. Possible range is 0–10; high scores are favorable.

†p < .10.

*p < .05;

**p < .01;

***p < .001.

^aPoint-biserial correlation.

*p < .05;

**p < .01;

***p < .001.