Gold Steven N, Hyman Scott M, Andrés-Hyman Raquel C
Center for Psychological Studies, Nova Southeastern University, Trauma Resolution and Integration Program (TRIP), 3301 College Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314, USA.
Child Abuse Negl. 2004 Nov;28(11):1199-212. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.07.001.
It has been suggested that survivors of ongoing childhood sexual abuse (CSA) tend to have been reared in ineffective family environments that render them particularly vulnerable to maltreatment and which foster psychological difficulties beyond those accounted for solely by their abuse. If this conjecture is valid, one would expect that the family of origin environments of CSA survivors would be disturbed whether their abuser was intra-familial or extra-familial. To assess this hypothesis, two studies compared the childhood family of origin environments and supportive parenting characteristics of a clinical sample of women sexually abused by family members only (the intra-familial group), by non-family members only (the extra-familial group), and by both family and non-family members (the "both" group).
Study 1 compared the three groups (total N = 213) using the Family Environment Scale (FES). Study 2 compared groups (total N = 86) on the positive parenting scales of the Exposure to Abusive and Supportive Environments Parenting Inventory (EASE-PI).
In Study 1, multivariate analyses indicated significant differences on the independence, cohesion, and conflict subscales of the FES. Pairwise comparisons revealed that the extra-familial group reported significantly higher levels of family independence and lower levels of conflict than the other two groups. In addition, the extra-familial group reported higher levels of cohesion than the intra-familial group. However, the effect sizes of these comparisons were extremely small. In Study 2, multivariate analyses revealed no group differences on the EASE-PI scales.
Low effect sizes on the three significant FES scales, non-significance on the remaining seven FES scales, and non-significance on the EASE-PI scales suggest that there is considerable similarity in the family of origin environments of adult female CSA survivors seeking therapy regardless of whether their perpetrators were family members, non-family members, or both family and non-family members.
有人提出,童年期遭受持续性性虐待(CSA)的幸存者往往在无效的家庭环境中长大,这种环境使他们特别容易受到虐待,并滋生出超出单纯虐待所导致的心理问题。如果这一推测成立,那么人们会预期,无论施虐者是家庭成员还是非家庭成员,CSA幸存者的原生家庭环境都会受到干扰。为了评估这一假设,两项研究比较了仅遭受家庭成员性虐待的女性临床样本(家庭内组)、仅遭受非家庭成员性虐待的女性临床样本(家庭外组)以及同时遭受家庭成员和非家庭成员性虐待的女性临床样本(“两者皆有”组)的童年原生家庭环境和支持性养育特征。
研究1使用家庭环境量表(FES)对三组(总样本量N = 213)进行比较。研究2使用虐待与支持性环境养育量表(EASE-PI)中的积极养育量表对几组(总样本量N = 86)进行比较。
在研究1中,多变量分析表明,FES的独立性、凝聚力和冲突分量表存在显著差异。两两比较显示,家庭外组报告的家庭独立性水平显著高于其他两组,冲突水平低于其他两组。此外,家庭外组报告的凝聚力水平高于家庭内组。然而,这些比较的效应量极小。在研究2中,多变量分析显示EASE-PI量表上不存在组间差异。
FES三个显著量表上的效应量较低、其余七个FES量表无显著性差异以及EASE-PI量表无显著性差异,表明寻求治疗的成年女性CSA幸存者的原生家庭环境存在相当大程度的相似性,无论其施虐者是家庭成员、非家庭成员还是两者皆有。