Intergenerational continuity of child sexual abuse: A mixed methods study of risk and protective factors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Child sexual abuse (CSA) is a prevalent traumatic experience worldwide. The negative effects of CSA can put children on a trajectory where they are likely to experience later abuse (revictimization) and to have children who may also experience sexual abuse (intergenerational continuity). Both theoretical and empirical research on CSA continuity is lacking. There are limited theoretical frameworks that have been developed to conceptualize intergenerational maltreatment, and more specifically to understand the reasons for intergenerational continuity of CSA. Additionally, there are few empirical studies that have specifically examined intergenerational cycles of CSA to identify distinguishing factors that can be targeted to reduce the risk of continuity. Qualitative research documenting individuals’ lived experiences of CSA and continuity is also clearly lacking in the literature, as well as mixed method designs. To address the limitations in the literature and enrich our understanding as to how CSA may continue within families, three studies were developed. A systematic review was developed for Study 1 to identify and synthesize the literature on theoretical and/or conceptual frameworks that have been used to explain victim-to-victim cycles of abuse, the most prevalent type of continuity for CSA whereas a parent and a child are victims of CSA, but the abused parent is not the perpetrator of their child’s abuse. Searches were executed in PsychINFO, Medline and Scopus; 15 papers were included in the final sample. There were only four papers identified on the continuity of CSA specifically, highlighting a lack of focus on the theoretical explanations of this issue. As a result of this systematic review, a unified model of maltreatment continuity, more specifically victim-to-victim cycles, was proposed, which has the benefit of guiding future investigations of CSA continuity and provides key intervention targets for clinicians. Study 2 was developed to document the role of individual (e.g., mental health, child maltreatment history), relational (e.g., attachment), and socioenvironmental factors (e.g., socioeconomic characteristics) in intergenerational cycles of CSA. Specifically, Study 2 aimed to compare cycle maintainers, cycle breakers, cycle initiators, and a control group within a sample of mother-emerging adult dyads (N = 186). The sample was recruited across Canada to participate in an online study. The results support prior research in showing that there is a higher risk of CSA in dyads where the mother experienced CSA (OR =1.38). Compared to cycle initiators, maintainers reported greater psychological distress (M = 27.23 vs. 35.18), and lower mother-rated parent-child attachment (M = 115.83 vs. 111.43). Maintainers reported more post-traumatic stress symptoms only in comparison to the control group (M = 24.82 vs. 10.13). Mothers in cycle maintaining dyads were exposed to more acts of domestic violence in childhood than those in cycle breaking dyads (OR = 2.43). To further understand these quantitative results, Study 3 involved conducting individual qualitative interviews with 23 mothers who experienced CSA (12 continuity, 11 discontinuity). A qualitative description of themes showed that mothers described a variety of experiences related to parent-child and romantic relationships and parenting behaviours (e.g., difficulties with expression emotions and affection, boundary setting, lack of confidence as a parent). A mixed method integration was completed which helped to clarify and expand upon quantitative findings. Several promising directions for research, prevention, and intervention for parents with histories of CSA were identified
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,036 | 0,050 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,013 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».