Cited by 104Child Abuse and TraumaAttachment and Relationship DynamicsIntimate Partner and Family Violence

Childhood Maltreatment and Relationship Quality: A Review of Type of Abuse and Mediating and Protective Factors

Zamir, Osnat·2022·Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Abstract

Childhood maltreatment (CM) has long been recognized as a risk factor for good intimate relationships. Research on the effects of CM on relationship functioning has focused on sexual abuse in girls. However, CM also includes emotional and physical abuse and neglect and is also common in boys. Moreover, prior research has mostly focused on individuals in isolation, ignoring that marriage is a system in which two partners mutually influence each other. Questions also remain about mediating and protective factors for healthy relationships in the context of CM. This article reviews the literature on the link between different forms of CM and one's own and one's partner relationship quality. It reviews 43 empirical studies that assessed associations between CM in any form and relationship quality. Also, mediating and protective factors and major methodological topics are examined. The review indicated that CM (neglect, sexual, emotional, or physical abuse) is associated with lower relationship quality in men and women. Psychological distress, cognitive and behavioral problems, insecure attachment, and self-dysregulation were identified as mediating factors. Protective processes involve good coping strategies, emotion regulation, parental support, and early secure attachment, but not partner characteristics. The results regarding gender are inconclusive. It is crucial to broaden the research on the dyadic effects of CM of various forms on relationship quality and study mediating and protective factors. More studies on neglect and diverse populations are needed, as well as prospective studies. This will enable the development of prevention programs for couples with a partner exposed to CM.

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 · 10.1177/1524838021998319

Cites

7 of 7 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

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
Zamir, O.
Affiliations
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
Corresponding author
Zamir, Osnat
Venue
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
Published
2021-03-04
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
1344-1357
ISSN
  • 1524-8380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8324
OpenAlex
W3134489351
Cited by
104
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trauma Violence & Abuse (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
Keywords
child abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, neglect, insecure attachment, self-regulation, emotion regulation, coping strategies, parental support, mediators, protective factors, dyadic effects, gender differences
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Child, Child Abuse, Female, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Sexual Partners, Protective Factors

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