Factor Structure of the Conflict Tactics Scale 1.
Kaori Baba, Fumie Takauma, Katsuhiko Tada and 4 others
PMID 28670586WHAT IT FOUND
A Japanese version of a child abuse screening tool for new mothers splits into two clear groups of questions: calm discussion and aggressive behaviour.
The questions about physical violence were almost never answered, so they could not be tested.
Key findings
01The tool separates into two factors: reasoning and psychological aggression.
02The original third factor of physical assault could not be identified because those items were virtually never reported.
03The two identified factors showed only a moderate correlation, suggesting they measure distinct behaviours.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was conducted on a general population of postpartum women, so it did not test the tool's ability to detect abuse in high-risk groups. The physical assault items were excluded due to low prevalence, meaning the scale's ability to measure physical violence was not validated. Self-report bias is possible, as mothers may underreport abusive behaviours due to social desirability. Only mothers were studied; fathers were not included. The goodness-of-fit for the model was relatively poor.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this tool is valid for screening physical child abuse. The questions about hitting, burning, or using weapons were excluded from the analysis because almost no mothers reported them, so the study provides no evidence that the scale detects these behaviours.