MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385620330 · doi:10.1080/10538712.2023.2243926

Do You See What I See? Emotion Recognition Competencies in Sexually Abused School-Aged Children and Non-Abused Children

2023· article· en· W4385620330 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Justine Caouette, Louise Cossette, Martine Hébert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Sexual Abuse · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAngerSexual abusePsychosocialPsychologyClinical psychologyChild sexual abuseSadnessPoison controlDevelopmental psychologyInjury preventionMedicinePsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Child sexual abuse (CSA) is a worldwide phenomenon that has been linked to deleterious consequences. Adverse life events, such as sexual abuse, can compromise the development of emotional competencies, an important dimension of children’s psychosocial development. This study aimed at evaluating emotion recognition competencies in sexually abused and non-abused children. The sample consisted of 97 sexually abused children (65 girls) and 78 non-abused children (56 girls) aged between 6 and 12 years. They were recruited in specialized intervention centers and elementary schools from the Montreal area. Recognition of joy, anger, fear, sadness, and neutral expressions was assessed using the Developmental Emotional Faces Stimulus Set (DEFSS; Meuwissen et al., 2017). Results of an ANCOVA revealed that the total scores of emotion recognition were significantly lower for victims of SA (M = 18.12, SE = 0.33) relative to non-abused children (M = 19.36, SE = 0.37), F(1,170) = 5.70, p < .05. Analyses performed on specific expressions yielded lower scores for the recognition of anger, F(1, 170) = 6.12, p = .014, partial η2 = .03, and joy, F(1, 170) = 8.04, p =.005, partial η2 = .04. Our findings highlight the importance of assessing emotion recognition competencies to improve intervention programs provided to sexually abused children and prevent the development of severe psychosocial problems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Sexual AbuseSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207