Circle of Security – Parenting™
Circle of Security – Parenting™ (COSP™) is a caregiver training and psychoeducation intervention that aims to improve caregiver-child relationships and enhance secure attachment. Modified from Circle of Security – Intensive™ (COS-Intensive™), COSP reduces the time and resources needed to implement the program. It uses stock footage to demonstrate content and does not require facilitators to be licensed therapists. COSP uses a visual map of attachment referred to as the “circle of security.” This map emphasizes the caregiver's role in providing a secure base from which their child can explore the world and a safe haven where their child can return for comfort.
COSP facilitators teach caregivers about the attachment system using an eight-chapter video-based series that covers topics such as the dyadic connection, the benefits of secure relating, children’s needs signaling, emotional availability, and shark music (i.e., experiences that can trigger a heightened sense of alertness in caregivers and may lead to avoidance behaviors or psychological discomfort). Stock video clips provide psychoeducational material, while facilitators pause at designated moments to add information, ask reflective or discussion questions, and engage participants in exercises.
COSP does not currently meet criteria to receive a rating because no studies of the program that achieved a rating of moderate or high on design and execution demonstrated a favorable effect on a target outcome.
Date Research Evidence Last Reviewed: Oct 2021
Sources
The program or service description, target population, and program or service delivery and implementation information was informed by the following sources: the program or service manual, the program or service developer’s website, and the California Evidence Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare.
This information does not necessarily represent the views of the program or service developers. For more information on how this program or service was reviewed, visit the download the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 1.0
Target Population
COSP is intended for caregivers seeking to improve the attachment relationship with their child. COSP is recommended for caregivers of children 4 months through 6 years old.
Dosage
COSP is delivered in at least 8 weekly sessions. Each session should be at least 90 minutes for a total program length of at least 12 hours. COSP is typically delivered in a group format with up to 12 caregivers but can also be delivered to caregivers individually.
Location/Delivery Setting
Recommended Locations/Delivery Settings
COSP is primarily delivered in clinical settings or community-based agencies/centers. It can also be delivered in participants’ homes.
Education, Certifications and Training
COSP Facilitators must have experience providing parent education. Facilitators must complete the 24-hour training (in-person or as a blended online training). The training teaches facilitators how to use the video-based manualized program, as well as how to identify secure and problematic caregiver-child interactions. Graduates of the COSP training become Registered Circle of Security Facilitators®.
Registered Circle of Security Facilitators have the option to receive Fidelity Coaching, a form of reflective supervision, by a Certified Fidelity Coach. Licensed psychotherapists have the option of becoming a Certified Fidelity Coach.
Program or Service Documentation
Book/Manual/Available documentation used for review
Circle of Security International. (2018). COSP™ facilitator manual.
Available languages
The COSP manual is available in English, Danish, French, Italian, Japanese, Mandarin, Norwegian, Romanian, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish. Other materials are available in English, Arabic, Cantonese, Danish, Estonian, French, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Mandarin, Norwegian, Portuguese, Romanian, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish.
Other supporting materials
Comparing COSP and COS-Intensive
For More Information
Website: https://www.circleofsecurityinternational.com/
Phone: (509) 462-2024
Email: info@circleofsecurityinternational.com
Note: The details on Dosage; Location; Education, Certifications, and Training; Other Supporting Materials; and For More Information sections above are provided to website users for informational purposes only. This information is not exhaustive and may be subject to change.
| Results of Search and Review | Number of Studies Identified and Reviewed for Circle of Security – Parenting™ |
|---|---|
| Identified in Search | 13 |
| Eligible for Review | 3 |
| Rated High | 0 |
| Rated Moderate | 1 |
| Rated Low | 2 |
| Reviewed Only for Risk of Harm | 0 |
| Outcome | Effect Size
 and Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child well-being: Behavioral and emotional functioning |
-0.01
0 |
1 (2) | 141 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Adult well-being: Positive parenting practices |
0.14
5 |
1 (2) | 141 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group.
| Outcome | Effect Size
and Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
Months after treatment when outcome measured
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child well-being: Behavioral and emotional functioning |
-0.01
0 |
1 (2) | 141 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 11676 - CoS-Parenting vs. Waitlist Control (Cassidy, 2017) | |||||
| Child Behavior Checklist: Externalizing Behavior |
-0.18
-7 |
- | 141 | - | 0 |
| Child Behavior Checklist: Internalizing Behavior |
0.15
5 |
- | 141 | - | 0 |
| Adult well-being: Positive parenting practices |
0.14
5 |
1 (2) | 141 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
- |
| Study 11676 - CoS-Parenting vs. Waitlist Control (Cassidy, 2017) | |||||
| Coping with Toddlers' Negative Emotions Scale: Supportive Responses |
-0.03
-1 |
- | 141 | - | 0 |
| Coping with Toddlers' Negative Emotions Scale: Unsupportive Responses |
0.30
11 |
- | 141 | - | 0 |
*p <.05
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention group and a negative number favors the comparison group. Effect sizes and implied percentile effects were calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse as described in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Section 5.10.4 and may not align with effect sizes reported in individual publications.
Only publications with eligible contrasts that met design and execution standards are included in the individual study findings table.
Full citations for the studies shown in the table are available in the "Studies Reviewed" section.
The participant characteristics display is an initial version. We encourage those interested in providing feedback to send suggestions to preventionservices@abtglobal.com.
The table below displays locations, the year, and participant demographics for studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Participant characteristics for studies with more than one intervention versus comparison group pair that received moderate or high ratings are shown separately in the table. Please note, the information presented here uses terminology directly from the study documents, when available. Studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution that did not include relevant participant demographic information would not be represented in this table.
For more information on how Clearinghouse reviewers record the information in the table, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
| Characteristics of the Participants in the Studies with Moderate or High Ratings | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Study Location
|
Study Year
|
Age or Grade-level
|
Race, Ethnicity, Nationality
|
Gender
|
Populations of Interest*
|
Household Socioeconomic Status
|
| Study 11676 - CoS-Parenting vs. Waitlist Control | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Baltimore, MD, USA | -- | Mean age: 51 months; Age range: 41-62 months | -- |
58% Sex - Girl 42% Sex - Boy |
-- | -- |
| Characteristics of the Adults, Parents, or Caregivers | ||||||
| Baltimore, MD, USA | -- | Mean age: 30 |
75% African American 12% White 8% Other ethnicity |
-- | 83% Marital status - single mothers | -- |
“--” indicates information not reported in the study.
* The information about disabilities is based on initial coding. For more information on how the Clearinghouse recorded disability information for the initial release, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings. The Clearinghouse is currently seeking consultation from experts, including those with lived experience, and input from the public to enhance and improve the display.
Note: Citations for the documents associated with each 5-digit study number shown in the table can be found in the “Studies Reviewed” section below. Study settings and participant demographics are recorded for all studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Studies that did not report any information about setting or participant demographics are not displayed. For more information on how participant characteristics are recorded, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Studies Rated Moderate
Study 11676Cassidy, J., Brett, B. E., Gross, J. T., Stern, J. A., Martin, D. R., Mohr, J. J., & Woodhouse, S. S. (2017). Circle of Security-Parenting: A randomized controlled trial in Head Start. Development and psychopathology, 29(2), 651-673. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579417000244
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Section 6.2.2)Studies Rated Low
Study 11685Risholm Mothander, P., Furmark, C., & Neander, K. (2018). Adding 'Circle of Security—Parenting' to treatment as usual in three Swedish infant mental health clinics Effects on parents’ internal representations and quality of parent‐infant interaction. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 59(3), 262-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12419
This study received a low rating because baseline equivalence of the intervention and comparison groups was necessary and not demonstrated.Study 11678
Gray, S. A. O. (2015). Widening the circle of security: A quasi‐experimental evaluation of attachment‐based professional development for family child care providers. Infant mental health journal, 36(3), 308-319. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.21513
This study received a low rating because it did not meet design confound standards.Studies Not Eligible for Review
Study 11673
Aarestrup, A. K., Skovgaard Væver, M., Petersen, J., Røhder, K., & Schiøtz, M. (2020). An early intervention to promote maternal sensitivity in the perinatal period for women with psychosocial vulnerabilities: Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychology, 8(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-00407-3
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 11674
Brennan, J. (2017). The Circle of Security intervention: Enhancing attachment in early parent-child relationships. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 35(2), 207-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2016.1277193
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 11675
Cassidy, J., Woodhouse, S. S., Sherman, L. J., Stupica, B., & Lejuez, C. W. (2011). Enhancing infant attachment security: An examination of treatment efficacy and differential susceptibility. Journal of Development and Psychopathology, 23, 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579410000696
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 11680
Kohlhoff, J., Stein, M., Ha, M., & Mejaha, K. (2016). The Circle of Security Parenting (COS-P) intervention: Pilot evaluation. Australian Journal of Child & Family Health Nursing, 13(1), 3-7. http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=116677922&site=ehost-live
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 11681
Kohlhoff, J., Cibralic, S., Wallace, N., Morgan, S., McMahon, C., Hawkins, E., Eapen, V., Briggs, N., Huber, A., & McNeil, C. (2020). A randomized controlled trial comparing Parent Child Interaction Therapy - Toddler, Circle of Security- Parenting™ and waitlist controls in the treatment of disruptive behaviors for children aged 14-24 months: Study protocol. BMC Psychology, 8(1), 93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-00457-7
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 11682
Maupin, A. N., Samuel, E. E., Nappi, S. M., Heath, J. M., & Smith, M. V. (2017). Disseminating a parenting intervention in the community: Experiences from a multi-site evaluation. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(11), 3079-3092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0804-7
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 11686
Rostad, W. L. (2014). Examining the effectiveness of the Circle of Security Parenting DVD Program. ERIC. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/10783
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible publication source (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.2).
Study 11687
Væver, M. S., Smith-Nielsen, J., & Lange, T. (2016). Copenhagen infant mental health project: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing Circle of Security -Parenting and care as usual as interventions targeting infant mental health risks. BMC Psychology, 4(1), 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-016-0166-8
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).
Study 12726
Cassidy, J., Ziv, Y., Stupica, B., Sherman, L. J., Butler, H., Karfgin, A., ... & Powell, B. (2010). Enhancing attachment security in the infants of women in a jail-diversion program. Attachment & Human Development, 12(4), 333-353.
This study is ineligible for review because it is not a study of the program or service under review (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.6).
Study 12728
Horton, E., & Murray, C. (2015). A quantitative exploratory evaluation of the Circle of Security‐Parenting program with mothers in residential substance‐abuse treatment. Infant Mental Health Journal, 36(3), 320-336.
This study is ineligible for review because it does not use an eligible study design (Study Eligibility Criterion 4.1.4).