Cited by 129Child Abuse and TraumaChild Abuse and Related TraumaMilitary, Security, and Education Studies

Teachers' reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect: behaviour and determinants

Goebbels, A. F. G., Nicholson, J. M., Walsh, K., De Vries, H.·2007·Health Education Research

Abstract

By reporting suspected child abuse and neglect, teachers can make an important contribution to the early detection and prevention of abuse. However, teachers are sometimes reluctant to report their suspicions. This study investigated the determinants of teachers' reporting behaviour using concepts from the Integrated Change Model. Self-report data were collected from 296 teachers employed in 15 Australian schools. Compared to their colleagues, teachers who had never suspected child abuse or neglect (non-detectors, N=57, 19%) were more likely to have a lower confidence in their skills for recognising the signs of abuse, a higher degree of perceived social support regarding reporting, less years teaching experience and lower academic qualifications. Among those who had suspected cases of child abuse or neglect (N=239, 81%), teachers who always reported their suspicions (consistent reporters, 82%) were more likely to have firm action plans about reporting and detecting signs of CAN than teachers who did not always report their suspicions (inconsistent reporters, 18%). While only a small proportion of the variance in detection and reporting status was explained, the results illustrate the utility of health promotion theory and methods for improving our understanding of these behaviours.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/her/cyn030

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goebbels, A. F. G., Nicholson, J. M., Walsh, K., & De Vries, H.
Affiliations
  • Royal Children's Hospital (AU)
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Venue
Health Education Research
Published
2007-10-22
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
941-951
ISSN
  • 0268-1153 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3648
OpenAlex
W2144506607
Cited by
129
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Education Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Child Abuse and Related Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Military, Security, and Education Studies
Keywords
child abuse, child protection, reporting behavior, health promotion theory, perceived social support, early detection of abuse, teaching experience, academic qualifications, school teachers
MeSH terms
Adult, Child, Child Abuse, Child Advocacy, Faculty, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Queensland, Schools, Mandatory Reporting

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