Family Translational Research Group, New York University.
Department of Psychology, The College at Brockport.
J Fam Psychol. 2020 Feb;34(1):101-111. doi: 10.1037/fam0000560. Epub 2019 Jul 22.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and International Classification of Diseases-11th Revision (ICD-11; proposed) now include criteria for clinically significant (a) intimate partner violence (IPV) and neglect and (b) child abuse and neglect. However, existing measures of IPV and child abuse do not allow for assessment of established criteria. The current study examines the convergent and response process validity of the Family Maltreatment (FM) measure of clinically significant physical and psychological IPV and child abuse. Participants (N = 126) completed the FM via computer and measures of IPV (Revised Conflict Tactics Scale; Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996) and child abuse (Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale; Straus, Hamby, Finkelhor, Moore, & Runyan, 1998) via paper-and-pencil. Participants who endorsed acts of aggression on the FM completed an audio-recorded computerized interview recounting the 2 most severe incidents. Verbalized incidents (n = 138) were coded for clinically significant family maltreatment. Results largely supported the convergent validity of the FM. Agreement of acts endorsed on the FM with those endorsed on convergent measures was excellent for IPV and physical child abuse, yet poor for psychological child abuse. Further, in support of the response process validity of the FM, comparison with observer ratings of interviews indicated few "false positives" and no "false negatives" on the FM across the examined types of clinically significant IPV and child abuse. In summary, the FM is a promising measure for the assessment of clinically significant physical and psychological abuse as defined in the DSM-5 and ICD-11 (proposed). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
《精神障碍诊断与统计手册-第五版》（DSM-5）和《国际疾病分类-第 11 版》（ICD-11；提议）现在包括临床上显著的（a）亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）和忽视，以及（b）儿童虐待和忽视的标准。然而，现有的 IPV 和儿童虐待测量方法无法评估既定标准。本研究检验了临床上显著的身体和心理 IPV 和儿童虐待的家庭虐待（FM）测量的收敛和反应过程有效性。参与者（N=126）通过计算机完成 FM 以及 IPV（修订冲突策略量表；斯特劳斯、哈比、博尼-麦考伊和苏格曼，1996）和儿童虐待（父母-儿童冲突策略量表；斯特劳斯、哈比、芬克尔霍、摩尔和鲁扬，1998）的纸笔测量。在 FM 上认可攻击行为的参与者完成了一个音频记录的计算机化访谈，讲述了 2 个最严重的事件。将言语化的事件（n=138）编码为临床上显著的家庭虐待。结果在很大程度上支持了 FM 的收敛有效性。FM 上认可的行为与收敛测量上认可的行为之间的一致性对于 IPV 和身体虐待儿童的一致性非常好，但对于心理虐待儿童的一致性较差。此外，支持 FM 的反应过程有效性，与访谈观察者评分的比较表明，在检查的各种临床上显著的 IPV 和儿童虐待类型中，FM 上几乎没有“假阳性”，也没有“假阴性”。总之，FM 是一种很有前途的评估 DSM-5 和 ICD-11（提议）中定义的临床上显著的身体和心理虐待的测量方法。（PsycINFO 数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。
