Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
ResumoVerificou-se em que medida variáveis cognitivas e afetivas/emocionais diferenciariam cuidadores notificados por abusos físicos (G1) de cuidadores sem esse histórico (G2). O Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP) foi utilizado para avaliar fatores de risco psicológicos em cuidadores. Um Questionário de Caracterização sócio-demográfica e outro econômico também foram empregados para equiparar os grupos. G1 apresentou um potencial de risco superior a G2, e maiores níveis de Angústia, Rigidez, Problemas com a Criança e Consigo, Problemas com os Outros, e um menor nível de Força do Ego. Essas variáveis se articulam para compor o risco de abuso físico, pois segundo o Modelo do Processamento da Informação Social, remeteriam a processos básicos cognitivos/afetivos subjacentes a percepções e avaliações/interpretações, associados ao comportamento parental abusivo. Palavras-chave: Maus-tratos, abuso físico, percepção, avaliação/interpretação, modelo do processamento da informação social. AbstractIt was verified to what extent cognitive and affective/emotional variables could distinguish caregivers accused of committing physical abuse (G1) from those without physical abuse records (G2). The Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP), which is an instrument designed to assess psychological risk factors in caregivers, was used. A questionnaire on socio-demographic characterization and another on economic classification were also employed to equate the groups. G1 presented a greater potential risk than G2, higher levels of Distress, Rigidity, Problems with the Child and with Themselves, Problems with Others, and a lower level of Ego Strength. These variables contribute with the composition of physical abuse risk, since, in agreement with the Social Information Processing Model, they would be related to cognitive and affective basic processes which are veiled to the perceptions and evaluation/interpretations, associated to abusive parental behavior. Keywords: Maltreatment, physical abuse, perception, evaluation/interpretation, social information processing model.A violência intrafamiliar, especialmente a praticada contra crianças, vem se tornando alvo de atenção na comunidade científica, tanto pela grande prevalência do fenômeno quanto pela gravidade de suas conseqüências. A World Health Organization (WHO) e a International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (ISPCAN, 2006) denominam esta forma de violência como "maus-tratos infantis" e indicam a existência de quatro principais tipos ou modalidades: abuso físico, abuso psicológico, negligência e abuso sexual, sendo foco deste estudo somente o abuso físico. De acordo com esses organismos, esse tipo pode ser definido como o "uso intencional da força física contra a criança que resulta, ou tem alta possibilidade de resultar em dano a sua saúde, sobrevivência, desenvolvimento e dignidade. Os atos agressivos incluem pancadas, surras, mordidas, estrangulamentos, queimaduras, envenenamentos e sufocamentos" (p. 10).Segundo Belsky (1993), a manifestação dos maus-tratos em c...
ResumoVerificou-se em que medida variáveis cognitivas e afetivas/emocionais diferenciariam cuidadores notificados por abusos físicos (G1) de cuidadores sem esse histórico (G2). O Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP) foi utilizado para avaliar fatores de risco psicológicos em cuidadores. Um Questionário de Caracterização sócio-demográfica e outro econômico também foram empregados para equiparar os grupos. G1 apresentou um potencial de risco superior a G2, e maiores níveis de Angústia, Rigidez, Problemas com a Criança e Consigo, Problemas com os Outros, e um menor nível de Força do Ego. Essas variáveis se articulam para compor o risco de abuso físico, pois segundo o Modelo do Processamento da Informação Social, remeteriam a processos básicos cognitivos/afetivos subjacentes a percepções e avaliações/interpretações, associados ao comportamento parental abusivo. Palavras-chave: Maus-tratos, abuso físico, percepção, avaliação/interpretação, modelo do processamento da informação social. AbstractIt was verified to what extent cognitive and affective/emotional variables could distinguish caregivers accused of committing physical abuse (G1) from those without physical abuse records (G2). The Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP), which is an instrument designed to assess psychological risk factors in caregivers, was used. A questionnaire on socio-demographic characterization and another on economic classification were also employed to equate the groups. G1 presented a greater potential risk than G2, higher levels of Distress, Rigidity, Problems with the Child and with Themselves, Problems with Others, and a lower level of Ego Strength. These variables contribute with the composition of physical abuse risk, since, in agreement with the Social Information Processing Model, they would be related to cognitive and affective basic processes which are veiled to the perceptions and evaluation/interpretations, associated to abusive parental behavior. Keywords: Maltreatment, physical abuse, perception, evaluation/interpretation, social information processing model.A violência intrafamiliar, especialmente a praticada contra crianças, vem se tornando alvo de atenção na comunidade científica, tanto pela grande prevalência do fenômeno quanto pela gravidade de suas conseqüências. A World Health Organization (WHO) e a International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (ISPCAN, 2006) denominam esta forma de violência como "maus-tratos infantis" e indicam a existência de quatro principais tipos ou modalidades: abuso físico, abuso psicológico, negligência e abuso sexual, sendo foco deste estudo somente o abuso físico. De acordo com esses organismos, esse tipo pode ser definido como o "uso intencional da força física contra a criança que resulta, ou tem alta possibilidade de resultar em dano a sua saúde, sobrevivência, desenvolvimento e dignidade. Os atos agressivos incluem pancadas, surras, mordidas, estrangulamentos, queimaduras, envenenamentos e sufocamentos" (p. 10).Segundo Belsky (1993), a manifestação dos maus-tratos em c...
Exposure of an aggressor to the suffering of his/her victim generally inhibits subsequent attacks [e.g. Baron, 1971a] presumably because of an empathic process. Physically abusive parents and individuals at high risk for child physical abuse are thought to present a deficit in empathy [e.g. Milner, Halsey and Fultz, 1995]. The present research was designed to investigate whether highrisk, compared to low-risk, subjects for child physical abuse select more aggressive responses and aggress with more intensity toward a supposed child whose behavior is adequate, inadequate or ambiguous in the presence of the child's pain cues. A second objective was to explore whether high-risk, compared to low-risk, subjects for child physical abuse fail to adequately integrate mitigating information and, therefore, do not inhibit their aggressive behavior following the receipt of mitigating information before or during an inadequate child behavior. Participants were engaged in an experimental task that involved attempting to teach a child how to proceed accurately through a computer-displayed maze and were given the opportunity to send positive (pleasant sounds and happy faces) and negative feedback (mad faces and unpleasant sounds) to the child. Two hundred and fifty undergraduate students participated in the experiment. A 2 Â 5 factorial design based on two levels of the participant's risk status (high, low) and five conditions based on the child's behavior and the introduction of mitigating information was employed. As expected, low-risk, compared to high-risk, subjects showed less aggression when mitigating information was provided.
It has been proposed that abusive parents and parents at high risk for child physical abuse could be more likely to view children's behavior as being motivated by hostile intent [e.g., Milner, 1993], as compared to nonabusive and low-risk parents. This kind of misattribution of other's behavior may inhibit empathic emotion, and therefore, could block the inhibiting effect of a victim's pain cues on aggression [Baron, 1979]. An experiment was designed to analyze the moderating effect of an adult victim's intent on aggression in high-and low-risk participants for child physical abuse. A 2 Â 2 factorial design based upon two levels of the participant's risk status (high, low) and two levels of victim's intent (positive, ambiguous) was employed. All participants observed an adult victim's pain cues. Ninety-five (48 high and 47 low risk for child physical abuse) undergraduate females enrolled in courses at the University of the Basque Country participated in the experiment. The main effects of victims' intent and of participants' risk status were statistically significant. Participants in the ambiguous victim's intent condition aggressed significantly more than participants in the positive victim's intent condition. Moreover, high-risk participants aggressed more than low-risk participants regardless of the victim's intent. A significant interaction between risk status and victim's intent was expected. High-risk subjects for child physical abuse were expected to aggress more than low-risk subjects only in the ambiguous victim's intent condition. However, results did not support this hypothesis. Aggr. Behav. 32:421-432, 2006. r
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.