{"title":"并非所有儿童对父母的暴力行为都是一样的:利用攻击功能进行基于人的分析","authors":"Travis Harries, Ashlee Curtis, David Skvarc, Michelle Benstead, Arlene Walker, Richelle Mayshak","doi":"10.1111/fare.12991","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To explore a typology of dyads experiencing child-to-parent violence (CPV) using the function of CPV (i.e., its motivation).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>CPV may be motivated by reactive (i.e., retaliatory), proactive (i.e., instrumental), or affective (i.e., primarily emotional) functions, which may co-occur intraindividually; however, their co-occurrence pattern is not fully understood.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>This study included 252 participants aged 27 to 78 years (<i>M</i> = 45.92, <i>SD</i> = 8.33; 96% female) who were caregivers of a young person aged 5 to 24 years (<i>M</i> = 13.18, <i>SD</i> = 4.86) and completed an online survey measuring the form and function of CPV and a range of child, parent, and dyadic factors. The majority of dyads were mother–child.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Latent profile analysis revealed two distinct types of dyads: <i>High-proactive</i> dyads reported severe, highly reactive and proactive CPV compared with <i>low-proactive</i> dyads in which proactive CPV was rare and reactive CPV was uncommon. Rates of affective CPV were similar across types. Analysis of variance demonstrated that high- and low-proactive dyads significantly differed across intervention-relevant parent, child, and dyadic factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>High-proactive dyads exhibited role reversal and spousification (i.e., parental conflict spill-over) in which caregivers were helpless, frightened, and frightening, and the young person possessed domineering traits. Low-proactive dyads were characterized by a comparatively in-control caregiver who exhibited intrusiveness and higher supervision and a young person who was comparatively less domineering.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Different types of dyads experiencing CPV may have unique intervention needs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48206,"journal":{"name":"Family Relations","volume":"73 3","pages":"1968-1988"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fare.12991","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not all child-to-parent violence is the same: A person-based analysis using the function of aggression\",\"authors\":\"Travis Harries, Ashlee Curtis, David Skvarc, Michelle Benstead, Arlene Walker, Richelle Mayshak\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/fare.12991\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>To explore a typology of dyads experiencing child-to-parent violence (CPV) using the function of CPV (i.e., its motivation).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>CPV may be motivated by reactive (i.e., retaliatory), proactive (i.e., instrumental), or affective (i.e., primarily emotional) functions, which may co-occur intraindividually; however, their co-occurrence pattern is not fully understood.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study included 252 participants aged 27 to 78 years (<i>M</i> = 45.92, <i>SD</i> = 8.33; 96% female) who were caregivers of a young person aged 5 to 24 years (<i>M</i> = 13.18, <i>SD</i> = 4.86) and completed an online survey measuring the form and function of CPV and a range of child, parent, and dyadic factors. The majority of dyads were mother–child.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Latent profile analysis revealed two distinct types of dyads: <i>High-proactive</i> dyads reported severe, highly reactive and proactive CPV compared with <i>low-proactive</i> dyads in which proactive CPV was rare and reactive CPV was uncommon. Rates of affective CPV were similar across types. Analysis of variance demonstrated that high- and low-proactive dyads significantly differed across intervention-relevant parent, child, and dyadic factors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>High-proactive dyads exhibited role reversal and spousification (i.e., parental conflict spill-over) in which caregivers were helpless, frightened, and frightening, and the young person possessed domineering traits. Low-proactive dyads were characterized by a comparatively in-control caregiver who exhibited intrusiveness and higher supervision and a young person who was comparatively less domineering.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Different types of dyads experiencing CPV may have unique intervention needs.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Family Relations\",\"volume\":\"73 3\",\"pages\":\"1968-1988\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fare.12991\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Family Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fare.12991\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fare.12991","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Not all child-to-parent violence is the same: A person-based analysis using the function of aggression
Objective
To explore a typology of dyads experiencing child-to-parent violence (CPV) using the function of CPV (i.e., its motivation).
Background
CPV may be motivated by reactive (i.e., retaliatory), proactive (i.e., instrumental), or affective (i.e., primarily emotional) functions, which may co-occur intraindividually; however, their co-occurrence pattern is not fully understood.
Method
This study included 252 participants aged 27 to 78 years (M = 45.92, SD = 8.33; 96% female) who were caregivers of a young person aged 5 to 24 years (M = 13.18, SD = 4.86) and completed an online survey measuring the form and function of CPV and a range of child, parent, and dyadic factors. The majority of dyads were mother–child.
Results
Latent profile analysis revealed two distinct types of dyads: High-proactive dyads reported severe, highly reactive and proactive CPV compared with low-proactive dyads in which proactive CPV was rare and reactive CPV was uncommon. Rates of affective CPV were similar across types. Analysis of variance demonstrated that high- and low-proactive dyads significantly differed across intervention-relevant parent, child, and dyadic factors.
Conclusion
High-proactive dyads exhibited role reversal and spousification (i.e., parental conflict spill-over) in which caregivers were helpless, frightened, and frightening, and the young person possessed domineering traits. Low-proactive dyads were characterized by a comparatively in-control caregiver who exhibited intrusiveness and higher supervision and a young person who was comparatively less domineering.
Implications
Different types of dyads experiencing CPV may have unique intervention needs.
期刊介绍:
A premier, applied journal of family studies, Family Relations is mandatory reading for family scholars and all professionals who work with families, including: family practitioners, educators, marriage and family therapists, researchers, and social policy specialists. The journal"s content emphasizes family research with implications for intervention, education, and public policy, always publishing original, innovative and interdisciplinary works with specific recommendations for practice.