Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Measurement of Maltreatment and Rates Intergenerational Maltreatment Transmission in a Low-Income Adolescent Sample

Fri, October 5, 4:45 to 6:15pm, Doubletree Hilton, Room: Fiesta II and III

Abstract

Childhood maltreatment experiences can initiate detrimental outcomes across development and increase parenting risk in future generations (Cicchetti & Toth, 2016). To properly study sequelae of maltreatment, measurement and detection remains an important topic of discussion in maltreatment research. Multiple informants have been used to estimate national incidence of maltreatment (Sedlak et al., 2010). However, there is little research that provides guidance about limitations and possible biases present when using different methods of ascertaining maltreatment experiences.
In this study, 303 low-income adolescents (Age 15-17) and their biological mothers were recruited based on presence or absence of maltreatment for adolescents present in lifetime CPS records, which were coded using the Maltreatment Classification System (Barnett, Manly, & Cicchetti, 1993). The Child Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ; Bernstein et al., 2003) was administered to adolescents and their mothers. Data presented in Table 1 shows that over half of the adolescents with CPS records of maltreatment denied maltreatment on the CTQ. A greater number of adolescents without maltreatment confirmed this status. Table 2 summarizes the rates of intergenerational maltreatment in adolescent maltreatment reporting groups. Causes or correlates of the maltreatment reporting discrepancy in this sample are unclear; further analyses indicated that timing, severity, or subtype did not differ between adolescents who denied and confirmed maltreatment experiences. This preliminary analysis offers a more detailed look at discrepancy in reporting of maltreatment for adolescents. Results have implications for studies linking maltreatment to health outcomes with potential differential findings based on the method of maltreatment ascertainment.

Authors