The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploring Empathy and Callous–Unemotional Traits as Predictors of Animal Abuse Perpetrated by Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence
Abstract
We explored the relation between empathy, callous–unemotional (CU) traits, and animal abuse in a sample of 290 seven- to twelve-year-old children whose mothers were exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV). The sample comprises mostly Latino and White participants, and 55% of the children’s mothers were born outside the United States (primarily Mexico). To our knowledge, among studies examining child-perpetrated animal abuse, this study is the first to examine empathy levels and one of only a few to examine CU traits. When comparing Griffith Empathy Measure (empathy) and Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits (callous–unemotional [CU] traits) scores with those from studies of White schoolchildren, our sample scored lower on affective empathy, higher on cognitive empathy, and lower for overall CU scores as well as Callous and Unemotional subscales. Of 290 children, 47 (16.2%) harmed an animal at least once according to either mother or child report. There were no significant sex or age differences between Abuse and No Abuse groups. The Abuse group scored significantly higher on affective empathy, CU, and Callousness/Unemotional subscales, and significantly lower on cognitive empathy. However, in regression analyses that controlled for income, only lower cognitive empathy and higher CU significantly predicted having abused an animal. In summary, low cognitive empathy (but not affective empathy) and CU traits may serve as reliable predictors of child animal abuse. However, replication of these results is necessary. A larger sample with a high percentage of Latino children whose mothers were exposed to IPV, along with a non-exposed comparison group, would be ideal.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Empathy and attachment are both related to the quality of human–animal relationships and problems in empathy, attachment and emotion regulation are associated with animal abuse and cruelty [37,38,39,40].”
From The Complexity of the Human–Animal Bond: Empathy, Attachment and Anthropomorphism in Human–Animal Relationships and Animal Hoarding (2022) · cites this paper as [40]
Citations
Cites
Blair, R. J. R. (2005) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.004 · Cited by 1,365
Annotation: The Development of Antisocial Behavior: An Integrative Causal Model
Lahey, B. B., Waldman, I. D., & McBurnett, K. (1999) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00484 · Cited by 325
Examining the relationship between low empathy and self‐reported offending
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2007) · Legal and Criminological Psychology · doi:10.1348/135532506x147413 · Cited by 142
Research works printed but not linked: 38
- 10.1177/088626099014009004 · DOI
- 10.2752/089279392787011421 · DOI
- 10.2752/089279393787002105 · DOI
- 10.2752/089279396787001455 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-843X.109.2.335 · DOI
- 10.1097/01.chi.0000128786.70992.9b · DOI
- 10.1521/pedi.16.4.360.24124 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.10.014 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.02058.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s10578-007-0075-4 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02323.x · DOI
- 10.1375/acri.35.3.363 · DOI
- 10.1023/B:JACP.0000026145.69556.d9 · DOI
- 10.1177/0886260505283341 · DOI
- 10.1177/0886260508319362 · DOI
- 10.1177/1073191106287354 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10862-008-9111-3 · DOI
- Frick P. J. (2004). The inventory of callous-unemotional traits. Unpublished rating scale, University of New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=frick+2004+inventory&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6 · DOI
- Frick P. J., 2003, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 31, 457
- 10.1016/0272-7358(93)90016-F · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01862.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1163/156853008X323385 · DOI
- 10.1177/0886260515614281 · DOI
- 10.1177/0734016808325062 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.avb.2003.03.001 · DOI
- 10.1002/ab.20154 · DOI
- 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1999)25:2<81::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-M · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.04.002 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.avb.2008.07.005 · DOI · Paper page
- Merz-Perez L., 2004, Animal cruelty: Pathway to violence against people
- 10.1016/S0272-7358(00)00066-0 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.324 · DOI
- 10.1097/CHI.0b013e31819c2419 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10578-010-0206-1 · DOI
- 10.2752/089279300786999699 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1073191109344153 · DOI
- 10.1177/073401680402900203 · DOI
- 10.1177/0886260508314309 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fong, V. C., Hawes, D., & Allen, J. L. (2019) · Trauma, Violence, & Abuse · doi:10.1177/1524838017692383 · Cited by 166
Prato-Previde, E., Basso Ricci, E., & Colombo, E. S. (2022) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani12202835 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Hartman, C., Hageman, T., Williams, J. H., Mary, J. S., & Ascione, F. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Denver, CO, USA
- Venue
- Journal of Interpersonal Violence
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-25
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2419-2437
- ISSN
- 0886-2605
- 1552-6518
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (5R01HD66503-4)
- American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (2015-0709)
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