We recently identified five cases with minor errors regarding the chronicity of childhood abuse/neglect experiences (no other abuse/neglect parameters were affected by these errors) in our original article (Raby, Labella, Martin, Carlson, & Roisman, Reference Raby, Labella, Martin, Carlson and Roisman2017). The correlation between the original and the corrected measure of abuse/neglect chronicity was r = .99, and regression analyses involving the corrected measure indicated no changes regarding the statistical significance of the associations between abuse/neglect chronicity and the Adult Attachment Interview or Current Relationship Interview dimensions. Updated versions are presented of the three affected tables containing the results related to abuse/neglect chronicity.

In addition, the descriptive information for the abuse and neglect codes originally included on page 351 should be amended as follows:

For the entire Minnesota Longitudinal Study of Risk and Adaptation sample, 47 individuals were classified as being abused and/or neglected in infancy and 66 were classified in early childhood. For the subsample of 164 participants included in the analyses we reported originally (Raby et al., Reference Raby, Labella, Martin, Carlson and Roisman2017), of those who experienced abuse and/or neglect, 36% experienced abuse and/or neglect in infancy, 65% during early childhood, 72% during middle childhood, and 23% during adolescence (not mutually exclusive). Regarding chronicity, 34% of this group experienced abuse and/or neglect during one developmental period, 33% during two periods, 23% during three periods, 3% during all four developmental periods, and 8% of participants had insufficient data to determine the number of developmental periods (numbers sum to more than 100% because of rounding).

We regret this error and any problems it may have caused.