24 measurements spanning 28 days, net -6. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 14,930–14,973 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 24
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
3 Sept 2026, 13:42
14,954
+3
2 Sept 2026, 04:37
14,951
+2
1 Sept 2026, 03:26
14,949
+7
30 Aug 2026, 23:38
14,942
+7
29 Aug 2026, 23:34
14,935
-2
28 Aug 2026, 22:17
14,937
+2
27 Aug 2026, 23:17
14,935
-2
26 Aug 2026, 19:55
14,937
-6
25 Aug 2026, 19:51
14,943
-3
23 Aug 2026, 03:36
14,946
-2
21 Aug 2026, 19:08
14,948
+1
20 Aug 2026, 19:22
14,947
-1
18 Aug 2026, 20:53
14,948
-2
17 Aug 2026, 19:54
14,950
-6
16 Aug 2026, 15:03
14,956
+8
14 Aug 2026, 20:14
14,948
-3
13 Aug 2026, 13:28
14,951
-5
12 Aug 2026, 13:37
14,956
-5
11 Aug 2026, 15:42
14,961
-4
10 Aug 2026, 19:17
14,965
first reading
Engagement
44 posts held, back to 29 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 53 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
11.6%
avg views ÷ 14,954 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,730
30 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.62%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
30
of 44 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 29 of 30 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 3 September 2026
Posts held
44 (29 July 2026 – 3 September 2026)
Views total
51,949
Reactions total
1,807
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
3 Sept 2026, 11:01 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
3m 44s
Average length
1m 52s
Measured directly from 2 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
Reaction mix
2,431 reactions across 43 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 56.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
1,371
56.4%
🔥
414
17.0%
😁
141
5.80%
👍
97
3.99%
🙏
70
2.88%
👏
62
2.55%
😱
51
2.10%
🤣
45
1.85%
👎
44
1.81%
🕊
38
1.56%
🤝
30
1.23%
🥰
30
1.23%
😢
14
0.576%
🦄
8
0.329%
🤯
7
0.288%
🤓
5
0.206%
🥴
4
0.165%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 43 of the 44 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 2,431 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 44 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 3 September 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
13
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 44 we hold a reading for · 7%
Most on one post
10
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @attachment_theory. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 44 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 3 September 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Знаете, что кажется любопытным?
Я думаю, что вклад в благополучие от тела и от психики примерно равный — именно в благополучие. Пропорции неблагополучия, конечно, разные.
Но если что-то болит в теле, лишь немногие из нас терпят до упора, до серьезного кризиса. Обычно добровольно идут к врачу и начинают длительную эпопею поиска лечения. И лечатся.
Но если болит «душа», она же «психика», все ровно наоборот: немногие…
Если задуматься, есть ведь намного больше идей и убеждений, которые держат нас в состоянии постоянного внутреннего отчуждения от других людей. Их прямо на категории делить можно.
Моя история — к первой категории, про «помощь недоступна». Но в ней же есть и другие, вроде «просить = быть должным», и набившее оскомину булгаковское «никогда и ничего не просите, сами дадут», и «мне недостаточно плохо, чтобы обращаться за…
Небольшое самораскрытие — потому что тема поглотила моё внимание и слишком точно совпала со временем, в котором мы живём.
Я боюсь, что если что-то со мной случится — я останусь один. Наверное, слово «боюсь» не точное: я скорее ожидаю и знаю, что так и случится.
«Мне никто не придет на помощь»
Однажды меня задержали прямо под подъездом по подозрению в наводке на кражу в магазине. История по итогу ерундовая. Но в не…
Ищу одну книжку по теории привязанности. Открываю сайт из поисковика, а мне предлагается взять ее в Королевской библиотеки Дании поблизости от Минска (за почти 1000 км).
OH MY SWEET SUMMER CHILD
Сюда входит много примеров: выдержать направленную на себя злость, не ответив тем же; сказать «мне кажется, между нами что-то произошло» вместо объяснений клиенту его сопротивленич; признать свою неправоту — и не рассыпаться при этом. Радует, что этому можно учиться.
И цифра, которая лучше всего подтверждает мою мысль про плохую операционализацию: от сорока до шестидесяти процентов различий в исходах терапии не объя…
Я читал много хороших книг, в которых много говорилось про качество отношений. Но вспоминая их сейчас, ловлю себя на мысли, что довольно часто, говоря про терапевтические отношения, авторы либо чрезмерны, либо недостаточны. Либо говорят слишком метафорично и красиво, либо слишком грубо, терминологически и непонятно для живого человека, оказавшегося терапевтом, либо вовсе опираются на характеристики техник, не описыва…
Добавлю пару деталей про книгу, подразню вас, пока нет более официальной информации от издательства.
Книга состоит из четырёх главных частей:
1. История. Эта часть может показаться излишней, потому что представляет собой краткое (по моим меркам) описание идей, легших в основу теории привязанности и биографий Джона Боулби и Мэри Эйнсворт. Мы остановимся на моменте более-менее устойчивого признания науки о привязанно…
Друзья и коллеги!
Момент, к которому я двигался больше двух лет: моя книга «Привязанность: от раннего детства до взрослых отношений. Комплексное руководство по теории привязанности» вышла в предзаказ!
Сейчас её можно заказать по минимальной, очень комфортной и доступной цене → mann-ivanov-ferber.ru/catalog/product/sviaz-mezdu-nami/
Когда-то я сам отчаянно искал цельное и глубокое руководство по теории привязанност…
Травма — она буквально просится быть «засвидетельствованной».
Но в большинстве случаев этому голосу невозможно дать силу. Потому что страшно, потому что тревожно, потому что стыдно, или потому что есть океан вины.
И свидетельствование как внутреннее требование совсем не равно «рассказу» или «фиксации», скажем, на бумаге или даже на диктофон. Свидетельствование требует другого, способного выдерживать и удерживать со…
Мне кажется, лучше и богаче возможности учиться консультированию в гуманистической и клиент-центрированной терапии не появлялось в русскоязычном пространстве.
И ведь я когда-то искал, где учиться тому, что Роджерс описывал в своих работах. Результаты поисков были совсем безрадостны.
А теперь можно учиться у его коллег, да еще и на русском. Насколько же все поменялось…
И, как мне кажется, сейчас изменилось время: п…
⚡️Открываем прием заявок на программу обучения с Уиллом Стиллвеллом и Антонио Сантосом 2026-2027
Начните изучение человекоцентрированной терапии с именитыми коллегами Карла Роджерса!
• 9 учебных семинаров
• 300 ак.часов теории и практики
• сертификат от калифорнийского центра
Между модулями вас ждет:
• Практика консультирования, в том числе с реальными клиентами.
• Отработка навыков.
• Разбор терапевтических случа…
🔥8❤3🙏2👎1
Signed Daniel Ost.
Showing the 12 most recent of 44 posts we hold for @attachment_theory. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Posts edited after publishing
@attachment_theory edited 3 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
8 August 2026
Most recent edit
30 August 2026
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Чувствуете ли вы себя востребованным специалистом?
Да27%
Не всегда, но бывает37%
Нет23%
Я не психолог13%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 44 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 3 September 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
Чистые Когниции @pure_cognitions · 37,633 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 31 August 2026
Клинический психоанализ @clinicalpsychoanalysis · 36,574 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 1 September 2026
Людмила Петрановская @lpetranovskaya · 168,812 Telegram ranks this channel #38 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 12 August 2026
Психотерапевт Прибытков @pribytkov_psy · 39,821 Telegram ranks this channel #53 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 30 August 2026
Дубынин о мозге 🧠 @dubininvaofficial · 44,300 Telegram ranks this channel #67 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 28 August 2026
#ЧёртовыПодростки @FreakingTeens · 38,680 Telegram ranks this channel #79 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 31 August 2026
Мама в Телеграме @mamavtelegrame · 47,521 Telegram ranks this channel #86 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 26 August 2026
This channel appears in 7 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 3 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Психотерапия и привязанность” (@attachment_theory), 14,954 subscribers as measured 3 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/attachment_theory.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.