Child-to-parent violence: The role of exposure to violence and its relationship to social-cognitive processing

Contreras, Lourdes; Cano, María del Carmen

doi:10.1016/j.ejpal.2016.03.003

Cited by 91 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, family cohesion was a significant protective factor of child-to-parent violence. It is well-known that when there is negative environment in families, as indicated by having family conflict, marital violence, or parent-to-child violence, will be more probably that children use violence against parents, as indicated some previous studies (Gámez-Guadix and Calvete, 2012; Jaureguizar et al, 2013; Ibabe, 2015; Contreras and Cano, 2016). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…So that, the positive parent-child relationships is considered as a protective factor of adolescents' verbal or physical abuse of their parents (Estévez and Navarro, 2009; Ibabe, 2015). Similarly, there are several evidences that support the relationship between victimization from parents toward children and violence from children toward parents taking into account community samples (e.g., Ibabe and Jaureguizar, 2011; Gámez-Guadix and Calvete, 2012) and offenders samples (child-to-parent offenders and other offenders; Contreras and Cano, 2016). Child-to-parent violence was strongly associated with the lack of emotional support (Calvete et al, 2014a), as well as with parents with unrealistic expectations, or deficit in communication skills (Paulson et al, 1990; Kennedy et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Academic Failure and Child-to-Parent Violence: Family Protective Factors

Ibabe

2016

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A reduction in academic achievement over the course of adolescence has been observed. School failure is characterized by difficulties to teaching school goals. A variety of other behavioral problems are often associated with school failure. Child-to-parent violence has been associated with different school problems. The main objective of current study was to examine the contribution of family variables (parental education level, family cohesion, and positive family discipline) on academic failure and child-to-parent violence of adolescents from a community sample. Moreover, a goal was to explore if academic failure was a valid predictor of child-to-parent violence. To this end, it has been developed a comprehensive statistical model through Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Participants were 584 children from eight secondary schools in the Basque Country (Spain) and aged between 12 and 18. Among other scales Conflict Tactics Scale and Family Environment Scale were administrated for measuring child-to-parent violence and family cohesion environment, respectively. The structural model revealed that parental education level is a relevant protective factor against academic failure. Positive family discipline (inductive discipline, supervision, and penalty) show a significant association with child-to-parent violence and academic failure. Disciplinary practices could be more efficient to prevent child-to-parent violence or school failure if children perceive a positive environment in their home. However, these findings could be explained by inverse causality, because some parents respond to child-to-parent violence or academic failure with disciplinary strategies. School failure had indirect effects on child-to-parent violence through family cohesion. For all that, education policies should focus on parental education courses for disadvantaged families in order to generate appropriate learning environments at home and to foster improvement of parent-child relationships.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic Failure and Child-to-Parent Violence: Family Protective Factors

Ibabe

2016

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This bidirectionality has been noted as a possible explanatory factor (Del Hoyo-Bilbao, . Indeed, direct exposure to violence in the home, as well as indirect exposure (witnessing violence between parents or between other family members) have been correlated with CPV (Boxer, Gullan, & Mahoney, 2009;Contreras & Cano, 2016;Gamez-Guadix, Jaureguizar, Almendros, & Carrobles, 2012;Routt & Anderson, 2011). A recent meta-analytic review (Gallego, Novo, Fariña, & Arce, 2019) found that the risk of developing CPV among children victimized by their parents increased 71% as compared to non-victimized children.…”

Section: Research On Cpv: What Do We Know?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Risk and Protective Factors in Clinical and Judicial Child-to-Parent Violence Cases

Loinaz

Sousa

2019

The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TChild-to-parent violence takes different forms (physical, psychological or economic) and can be addressed in the judicial system or in clinical practice. The current paper compares 61 clinical and 30 judicialized cases that were evaluated using the Child-to-Parent Violence Risk assessment tool (CPVR). Results showed a higher prevalence of risk factors in the judicial sample. This group of aggressors had worse profiles of violence (bidirectionality of the parent/child violence, violence other than CPV, and more CPV complaints), more psychological issues (low frustration tolerance, little anger management, narcissism, and violent attitudes) and, most notably, more dysfunctional families (violence between parents, cohabitation problems, inversion of the hierarchy, non-violent conflicts, and even criminal history of the parents). Logistic regression showed that narcissism, attitudes justifying violence, violence between parents, and problems of parents themselves (such mental disorders or drug abuse) allowed for correct classification of 89.4% of cases. Total CPVR scores differed between groups (25.8 vs. 14.2), and classification was good for both type of group (AUC = .830) and injuries to mother (AUC = .764). A cut-off score between 22 and 23 showed the best results in prediction of group and injuries to mother. Utility of the CPVR, and next steps in its development are discussed.La evaluación de factores de riesgo y de protección en casos clínicos y judiciales de violencia filio-parental R E S U M E N La Violencia Filio-Parental (VFP) puede manifestarse de distintas formas (física, psicológica o económica) y su abordaje puede hacerse desde el sistema judicial o desde la práctica clínica. El presente estudio compara 61 casos clínicos (no judicializados) y 30 judicializados que fueron evaluados con la Guía para la Valoración del Riesgo de Violencia Filio-Parental (RVFP). Los resultados mostraron una mayor prevalencia de los factores de riesgo en la muestra judicial, con un perfil de violencia peor (más bidireccionalidad, más violencia distinta a la VFP y más denuncias por VFP), más complicaciones psicológicas en los agresores (baja tolerancia a la frustración, poco control de la ira, narcisismo y actitudes violentas) y, en especial, un perfil familiar más disfuncional (violencia entre los padres, problemas de convivencia, inversión de jerarquía, conflictos e incluso antecedentes delictivos en los padres). Una regresión logística puso de manifiesto que el narcisismo, las actitudes que justifican la violencia, la violencia entre los progenitores y los problemas de los padres (como trastorno mental o abuso de drogas) permitían clasificar correctamente al 89.4% de los casos. El grupo midió diferencias en la puntuación en la Guía RVFP (25.8 vs. 14.2) y la clasificación fue buena para el tipo de grupo (AUC = .830) y lesiones a la madre (AUC = .764). Un punto de corte entre 22 y 23 mostró los mejores resultados en la predicción del grupo y las lesiones a la madre. Se discute la utilidad de la RVFP y los sigui...

show abstract

“…Additionally, no differences in social self-concept means that the children assessed their social fit as normal instead of the negative effects of parental separation, linked to deviation risk (Contreras and Cano, 2016). The results showed parental separation led to a mean increase of approximately 20% in depressive symptoms, anxiety (generalized), hostility, paranoid ideation, and interpersonal alienation, as well as a “global severity distress” (GSI), with a very important size of injury (≥1/10), which becomes chronic and is linked to continued exposure to stressors derived from parental separation (Hetherington, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating the Epidemiology and Quantifying the Damages of Parental Separation in Children and Adolescents

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parental separation is linked to multiple negative outcomes for children in all spheres of life. A field study was designed to estimate the epidemiology and to quantify the outcomes on the wellbeing of children from separated parents. Thus, data on socio-economic status, psychological adjustment, behavioral disorders, social relations, self-concept, and academic achievement were gathered from 346 children and adolescents, 173 separated parents, and 173 parents from intact families in the paediatric catchment area of Galicia (Spain). The results showed that parental separation had a significant negative impact on the children’s and adolescents’ family income (increasing the probability of falling below the poverty line); psychological adjustment (i.e., higher scores in anxiety, depression, hostility, paranoid ideation, and interpersonal alienation); social relations (i.e., less self-control in social relations; higher social withdrawal); self-concept (lower levels of academic, emotional, physical, and family self-concept), and academic achievement (lower academic achievement with higher school dropout rates). Moreover, children from separated families had a higher probability of being exposed to gender violence. Epidemiologically, parental separation is associated to the probability of falling below the poverty line 33.9%; being exposed to gender violence 43.2%; and symptoms such as depression, anxiety, hostility, paranoid ideation interpersonal alienation, and social withdrawal, i.e., 20, 17, 27, 20, 19, and 35.5%, respectively. Inversely, self-control in social relations, and academic, emotional, physical, and family self-concept fell to 16, 32, 27, 22, and 37%, respectively. The interrelationship among these variables and the implications of these results for interventions are discussed.

show abstract

Child-to-parent violence: The role of exposure to violence and its relationship to social-cognitive processing

Cited by 91 publications

References 40 publications

Academic Failure and Child-to-Parent Violence: Family Protective Factors

Academic Failure and Child-to-Parent Violence: Family Protective Factors

Assessing Risk and Protective Factors in Clinical and Judicial Child-to-Parent Violence Cases

Estimating the Epidemiology and Quantifying the Damages of Parental Separation in Children and Adolescents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About