Cited by 17Child Abuse and TraumaSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesMilitary, Security, and Education Studies

Telling a trusted adult: Factors associated with the likelihood of disclosing child sexual abuse prior to and during a forensic interview

Open access
Grandgenett, Hanna M., Pittenger, Samantha L., Dworkin, Emily R., Hansen, David J.·2021·Child Abuse & Neglect

Abstract

Background Many child sexual abuse (CSA) survivors delay or withhold disclosure of their abuse, even when presenting for formal investigation interviews.Objective This study examined factors that relate to the CSA disclosure process.Participants and settings Participants were CSA victims (N = 1,732) presenting to a Child Advocacy Center (CAC) for a forensic interview.Method We tested a structural model to predict disclosure before and during a forensic interview using secondary data analysis.Results Youth were less likely to disclose before a forensic interview if they witnessed domestic violence (β = -.233, p < .05). Caregivers were less likely to believe the abuse allegation if the alleged perpetrator resided in the home β = -.386, p < .05) and more likely to believe if the youth made a prior disclosure (β = .286, p < .05). Youth were more likely to disclose during the forensic interview if they were older (β = .388, p < .05), if the alleged perpetrator resided in their home (β = .209, p < .05), if they disclosed prior (β = .254, p < .05), and if their caregiver believed the allegation (β = .213, p < . 05). The alleged perpetrator residing in the youth's home (β = -0.082, p < .05) and making a prior disclosure (β = 0.060, p < .05) were both indirectly associated with forensic interview disclosure through caregiver belief.Conclusions Findings highlight the importance of the family context and caregiver belief in the disclosure process for youth involved in formal CSA investigations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104193

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grandgenett, H. M., Pittenger, S. L., Dworkin, E. R., & Hansen, D. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Grandgenett, Hanna M.
Venue
Child Abuse & Neglect
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-06
Volume
116
Issue
Pt 1
Pages
104193
ISSN
0145-2134 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2976716031
Cited by
17
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Child Abuse & Neglect (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Military, Security, and Education Studies
Keywords
child sexual abuse, disclosure, forensic interviewing, child advocacy centers, domestic violence exposure, family environment, abuse investigation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child Abuse, Child Abuse, Sexual, Child Advocacy, Humans, Self Disclosure, Disclosure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review