Emotion Regulation and Mental Health among Men with Childhood Sexual Abuse Histories
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood sexual abuse (CSA) is a form of child maltreatment which has been increasingly recognized as a common experience among men. Research on male CSA remains under-developed but suggests many negative mental health impacts. The current study examined the link between mental health outcomes and different emotion regulation strategies among 69 adult men. Men completed measures on their current mental well-being, and participated in a clinical interview about emotion regulation strategies used to manage memories about their sexual victimization. Results indicated that the most frequently used emotion regulation strategies were expressive suppression, rumination, and cognitive avoidance. For perceived effectiveness, men identified cognitive avoidance, self-medication, and behavioral avoidance as being most helpful in managing their CSA-related distress. Finally, greater use of deliberate self-harm, rumination, and behavioral avoidance was associated with more internalizing difficulties, while greater use of deliberate self-harm and self-medication was linked with more externalizing difficulties. Greater perceived efficacy of positive reappraisal was associated with fewer externalizing behaviors. Although these findings require replication through larger mixed-methods studies, they suggest the importance of incorporating emotion regulation strategies into interventions aimed at improving mental well-being among men with CSA histories.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it