Measuring the Impact of Abuser Role on Chronic and Severe Physical and Psychological Abuse

Background and Purpose: The prevalence of child physical and psychological abuse are well documented. Most studies have focused on abuse prevalence as either a singular occurrence by a singular abuser, or as multiple occurrences by a singular abuser. However, research suggests long-term negative outcomes are more severe for those who experience multiple victimizations by a mixture of perpetrators at multiple time points. Additionally, abuse chronicity (the frequency of abuse) and severity (the intensity of abuse) are often conflated in discussions around abuse dose-response outcomes. The focus of this study is to examine the role of the abuser in predicting psychological and physical abuse, while controlling for chronicity and severity, and other documented risk factors for abuse.

Methods: This study used secondary data from 819 youths aged 18 interviewed as part of the Longitudinal Studies of Child Abuse and Neglect (LONGSCAN) on measures of physical and psychological abuse, perpetrator role, and chronicity and severity. Physical and psychological abuse were measured with multiple (validated) scales. Abuser roles were coded into one of three categories (mother role, father role, someone else). Chronicity was measured over the four-recorded time epochs, while severity is represented by low/medium/high severity based on the type of physical and/or psychological abuse experienced. Bivariate analyses were conducted to examine the relationships among abuser roles, chronicity, severity, and types of abuse. Linear regression models were constructed (one for physical abuse, one for psychological abuse) to test the associations between abuser roles and chronicity of abuse, while controlling for other abuse risk factors. Data were analyzed in SPSS (v. 25).

Findings: Correlational analyses demonstrated clear associations between psychological and physical abuse. We found that psychological abuse and physical abuse were very highly associated. Bivariate analyses revealed the incidence of either abuse was highest at the first epoch (age 4) and tapered off consistently over time for the mother/father roles. The third category, someone else, abuse peaked at the second epoch and tapered off slower. Multiple linear regression models, constructed for both physical and psychological abuse, demonstrated that almost 25 percent of each sample reported experiencing both types of abuse. One third of the abused sample experienced abuse by at least two roles across both abuse domains. Linear regression models revealed that 35 percent of the psychological abuse and 25 percent of physical abuse was reported as severe.

Conclusion and Implications: Evidence derived from examining the predictive role of abuser-type in tandem with chronicity and severity demonstrate that for those at highest risk for abuse, the abuse is often not singular, nor is the role of the abuser. In homes and environments with the highest risk for abuse, we need to reexamine potential confounders (such as single parenting, race, and socio-demographic status) that may lead to multiple role abuse. Because those who experience both chronic and severe psychological and physical abuse are at an acutely increased risk for negative outcomes, it is imperative to proactively identify those families and children and tailor prevention and intervention methods best suited for the setting.