The role of multiple attachments in intergenerational transmission of child sexual abuse among male victims
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: According to Finkelhor (1984), difficulties child sexual abusers have in establishing adaptive adult relationships are a consequence of attachment problems with parents. Research shows that insecure attachment is associated with both the experience of child sexual abuse (CSA) as a victim and perpetration of CSA as an adult. Attachment may thus be a key factor in intergenerational transmission (IT) of CSA. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to examine the direct, interactive, and mediated effects linking attachment in different relationships (mother, father, romantic partner) to IT of CSA among male victims. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Thirty-two abusing and 27 non-abusing male CSA survivors were recruited, respectively, in a prison and via networks of former foster children or CSA victims. METHOD: All participants completed the Attachment Multiple Model Interview to assess attachment along four dimensions (security, deactivation, hyperactivation, and disorganization) in the relationship with mother, father, and partner. RESULTS: Partial least square modeling suggests that the partner carries forward (mediates) the increased risk of committing sexual abuse associated with insecure/disorganized attachment with the father. A significant partner-mother interaction also suggests that the deleterious effects of attachment to the mother in terms of committing CSA are countered by more secure/organized attachment to the partner. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the pivotal role of the romantic partner in IT of CSA. Beyond early intervention, therapy in adulthood aimed at fostering adaptive ways of finding emotional security in the relationship with an adult could thus be encouraged.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".