IIIIIIIIIIII' I'IIIIIII'I'I'“ 31293 01388 2323 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled CHILDREN'S KNOWLEDGE—BASED COMPETENCIES RELATED TO RECOGNITION AND AVOIDANCE OF POTENTIALLY ABUSIVE SITUATIONS presented by Margaret Ann Savage- has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for in“ "7) degree in (51’ f 'M’ 7’ ? in? Ali/[Y7 F #1 [/Ja/ mk/LZ -’ Major prorssor Date OLE/:2 /}’Df W95 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0— 12771 LIBRARY Michigan State University PLACE ll RETURN BOX to mow this chockout trom your rooord. TO AVOID FINES roturn on or Moro dot. duo. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE gig MSU lo An Afflnnotlvo WM Opportunlty Intuition CHILDREN'S KNOWLEDGE-BASED COMPETENCIES RELATED TO RECOGNITION AND AVOIDANCE OF POTENTIALLY ABUSIVE SITUATIONS By Margaret Ann Savage A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Departtnent of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education 1995 1. ABSTRACT CHILDREN'S KNOWLEDGE-BASED COMPETENCIES RELATED TO RECOGNITION AND AVOIDANCE OF POTENTIALLY ABUSIVE SITUATIONS By Margaret Ann Savage The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a strategy to elicit and describe children's knowledge relating to recognition and avoidance of potentially abusive situations. In order to accomplish this goal, the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy (KSAPAS) was developed to elicit children's prevention knowledge. This strategy involved reading eight vignettes representing both potentially abusive and non-abusive situations to children while showing them an illustration that depicted each scenario. After children were read each vignette, they were asked a set of five open-ended questions designed to elicit their perception of potential abuse in the scenario and their perception of what they should do in the situation. This study assessed 103 children in grades 3-7, both regular and special education populations from a suburban county in a midwestem state. The effects of children's sex, grade level, and educational status on acquisition of these competencies were examined. In addition, the effects of various characteristics of potentially abusive situations, including adult familiarity and child gender, on acquisition of this knowledge were studied. Subject grade level and situational characteristics of adult familiarity and child gender were found to have significant effects on acquisition of prevention knowledge. Copyright by MARGARET ANN SAVAGE 1995 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those who have made contributions to this research. I am especially grateful to Dr. Rochelle I-labeck, dissertation committee chairperson, for her invaluable feedback and continuous guidance and support throughout each phase of the study. I would also like to extend special thanks to Dr. Nancy Crewe, dissertation committee member, for her encouragement and support throughout the development of this study, and to Dr. Betsy Becker and Dr. Douglas Campbell, dissertation committee members, for their expert assistance with methodology and statistical analysis. The contributions of Dr. Sandra Cole, and Dr. Patricia Mullan are also greatly appreciated. Acknowledgments and thanks are also extended to the students, teachers, and administrators who participated in this study. In addition, I would like to express my appreciation to my friends and family, especially Philip Harak, for their loving support and patience throughout the dissertation process. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I - Introduction .................................................................... 1 Statement of the Problem .............................................................. 1 Purpose of the Study ................................................................... 3 Research Questions .................................................................... 5 Hypotheses ............................................................................. 6 Definition of Terms .................................................................... 7 CHAPTER II - Literature Review ............................................................ 9 Prevalence of Child Sexual Abuse .................................................. 9 Effects of Child Sexual Abuse ..................................................... 13 Factors Associated with Increased Risk for Child Sexual Abuse .............. 20 Risk Assessment for Child Sexual Abuse ........................................ 32 Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Education ....................................... 36 CHAPTER III - Methodology .............................................................. 47 Participants ........................................................................... 47 Development of the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy ................................................................ 49 Procedures ........................................................................... 56 Data Analysis ........................................................................ 60 CHAPTER IV - Results ..................................................................... 75 Knowledge-Based Competencies Relating to Recognition of Potential Abuse .................................................... 75 Knowledge-Based Competencies to Develop Strategies to Avoid Potential Abuse .............................................................. 95 Summary of Hypotheses and Results ........................................... 112 CHAPTER V - Discussion ................................................................ 119 Limitations of Study ............................................................... 119 Discussion of Major Findings .................................................... 122 Implications for Practice and Suggestions for Future Research .............. 143 Conclusions ........................................................................ 145 APPENDIX A - Core Concepts of Sexual Abuse Prevention Curricula ............. 148 APPENDIX B - Expert Judge Rating Form for Vignettes ............................ 150 APPENDIX C - Vignette Illustrations ................................................... 154 APPENDIX D - Student Biographical Questionnaire Completed by Teacher ....... 164 APPENDIX E - Student Biographical Questionnaire Completed by Researcher 166 APPENDIX F - Parent/Guardian Consent Form ....................................... 168 APPENDIX G - Teacher Consent Form ................................................ 170 APPENDIX H - Recording Sheet for Interview Responses .......................... 172 APPENDIX I - Interview Response Summary Sheet ................................. 173 APPENDIX J - Categorization of Subject Responses to Interview Questions ..... 191 REFERENCES ............................................................................. 248 vi LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO. PAGE NO. 1 Number of Subjects by Age, Sex and Educational Status ....................... 48 2 Percentage of Inter-Rater Agreement for Subject Response Coding ............ 63 3 Summary of Scoring System for Independent Variables ........................ 64 4 Summary of Scoring System for Dependent Variables .......................... 73 5 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in Major Response 10 11 12 13 I4 15 Categories for Recognition of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing Potential Abuse .............................................. 76 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in Major Response Categories for Recognition of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing No Abuse ......................................... 77 Number and Percentage of Correct and Incorrect Subject Responses for Recognition of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing Potential Abuse .............................................................. 78 Number and Percentage of Correct and Incorrect Subject Responses for Recognition of Absence of Abuse by Vignettes Representing No Abuse .................................................... 79 Means and Standard Deviations for Recognize Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ......................................................... 80 One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measures for Mean Recognize Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ...................................... 81 Post Hoc Analysis: Tukey Pairwise Comparisons of Mean Recognize Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ......................... 81 Mean Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ....... 82 One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measures for Mean Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes .................. 83 Between Subject Effects of Subject Characteristics on Recognition Competency Scores ......................................................... 84 Mean Sum Recognition Scores by Grade ......................................... 85 vii 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 26 27 29 30 Post Hoc Analysis: Tukey Pairwise Comparisons of Sum Recognition Means by Grade ............................................................. 86 Means and Standard Deviations for Knowledge-Based Competency Scores for Recognition of Potential Abuse by Vignette Characteristics ..................................................... 89 Interaction Effects of Subjects' Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette Characteristic of Abuse Level on Recognition Competency Scores ......................................................... 9O Interaction Effects of Subject Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette Characteristic of Adult Familiarity on Recognition Competency Scores .......................................................... 92 Mean Recognize Abuse-Known Adult Scores and Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult Scores by Educational Status ................... 93 Interaction Effects of Subject Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette Characteristic of Child Gender on Recognition Competency Scores ........................................... 94 Mean Recognize Abuse-Boy Scores and Recognize Abuse-Girl Scores by Subject Sex and Educational Status ..................................... 95 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in Major Response Categories for Avoidance of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing Potential Abuse ............................................... 97 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in Major Response Categories for Avoidance of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing No Abuse ...................................................... 98 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in each of the Response Scoring Categories for Avoidance Scores by Vignettes Representing Potential Abuse ................................................ 99 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in each of the Response Scoring Categories for Avoidance Score by Vignettes Representing No Abuse ...................................................... 100 Mean and Standard Deviations for Avoid Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ................................................................... 101 One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measures for Mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes .......................................................... 101 Mean and Standard Deviation for Not Avoid-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes .......................................................... 102 One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measures for Mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ............................ 103 viii M .- Iv .- 31 32 33 35 36 37 Post Hoe Analysis: Tukey Pairwise Comparisons of Mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes ............................ 103 Between Subject Effects of Subject Characteristics on Avoidance Competencies .................................................... 104 Means and Standard Deviation for Avoidance Competency Scores by Vignette Characteristics .................................................. 107 Interaction Effects of Subjects' Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette Characteristic of Adult Familiarity on Avoidance Competency Scores ............................................. 109 Mean Avoid Abuse-Known Adult Scores and Mean Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult Scores by Subject Characteristic of Sex .......................................................... 110 Mean Avoid Abuse-Known Adult Scores and Mean Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult Scores by Subject Characteristic of Educational Status .......................................................... 1 10 Interaction Effects of Subjects' Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette Characteristic of Child Gender on Avoidance Competency Scores ........................................................... 1 1 1 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem The rate of child sexual abuse is alarmingly high in our nation (Tobin, 1992; Sobsey, 1992; Finkelhor, Hotaling, Lewis & Smith, 1990). Research reveals that one in four girls and one in six boys are sexually abused by the age of 18 (Finkelhor, 1986.) Sexual abuse has deleterious, often long-term, effects on the individual's life. This high prevalence necessitates further research in the area of improving prevention interventions (Finkelhor, 1990; Finkelhor & Baron, 1986; Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992; Melton, 1992; Berrick & Gilbert, 1991). One important and potentially effective prevention intervention strategy is to empower children through school-based child sexual abuse prevention education (Goleman, 1993; Finkelhor, Asdigian & Dziuba-Ieatherrnan, 1993). Although researchers have acknowledged the importance of empowering children through prevention education, there has been no consensus among researchers regarding the most effective way for children to learn prevention concepts (Melton, 1992; Berrick & Gilbert, 1991). Researchers have agreed that more information is needed to help understand how children learn and retain the prevention concepts which are the core of prevention education programs. The National Youth Victimization Prevention Study is one of a few studies that examined the quality and effectiveness of existing prevention education in our nation (Finkelhor et al., 1993). Researchers interviewed a nationally representative sample of 2000 youths aged 10. 16 and their caretakers regarding the quality of existing programs. The results from this study suggested that prevention programs are prevalent but comprehensive programs are in the minority. In addition to studying the quality of existing programs, Finkelhor et al. ( 1993) studied the effectiveness of existing programs. Their findings suggested that children who were exposed to more comprehensive prevention programs (a) performed better on a short test of knowledge about sexual victimization, (b) were more likely to use the kinds of self - protection strategies recommended by prevention educators when victimized or threatened, (c) were more likely to disclose to someone about the attempts when victimized or threatened, and (d) were more likely to feel they were successful in protecting themselves when victimized. It was also noted that comprehensive parental instruction had positive effects on children's knowledge, coping skills, and inclination to disclose. The results from this study suggested that comprehensive programs can effectively help children learn to recognize and avoid potential abuse. Goleman (1993) interviewed researchers involved in studying the effectiveness of abuse prevention education and concluded that half of the school-based programs were inadequate and needed improvement. Suggestions for improving programs included more parental involvement, more frequent and consistent exposure to this information, and more exploration to help understand how children actually thwart victimization (Goleman, 1993). While it has been recognized that abuse prevention principles are an important subject area to teach, in some curricula a special focus in this area is not maintained throughout the school years (Finkelhor et al., 1993). For example, the author of this study conducted an informal but systematic review of a widely used personal safety curriculum implemented in school districts in a midwestem state, finding that the topic of sexual abuse prevention was not consistently emphasized throughout the school years (Michigan Department of Edueation, 1992.) This curriculum emphasized child sexual abuse prevention in the lower elementary grades, K4, but decreased this emphasis in subsequent grades. Curricular efforts directed toward prevention tended to shif t to topics of peer pressure, drug abuse, and general sex education in grades 5-8. Although these topics may relate to abuse prevention, they do not directly teach the abuse prevention principles emphasized in the lower grades. Abuse prevention may not be taught with the consistency and intensity over time that is necessary for some children to acquire knowledge-based competencies relating to recognition and avoidance of potentially abusive situations. \ull- I; .n_ r . .Mb '4‘: In addition to the concern for teaching prevention concepts in a consistent manner, Melton (1992) and Berrick and Gilbert (1991) stressed the importance of teaching prevention concepts in a developmentally appropriate manner. Children must be developmentally ready to learn and retain these concepts. Further research is needed to examine how children learn and retain these prevention concepts in order to more effectively design prevention curricula (Melton, 1992). In summary, researchers have agreed that more knowledge regarding children's acquisition of sexual abuse prevention concepts is needed in order to improve the effectiveness of prevention programs. This study will help to attain this research goal by providing information regarding children's acquisition of prevention concepts. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a strategy to elicit and describe children's knowledge relating to recognition and avoidance of potential sexually abusive situations. The effects of children's sex, grade level, and educational status on acquisition of these competencies were examined. In addition, the effects that various characteristics of potentially abusive situations had on acquisition of this knowledge were studied. In order to accomplish this research goal, the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy (KSAPAS) was developed to elicit and describe children's prevention knowledge. This strategy involved reading eight vignettes representing both potentially abusive and non-abusive situations to children while showing them an illustration that depicted each scenario. After children were read each vignette, they were asked a set of five open—ended questions designed to elicit their perception of potential abuse level in the scenario and their perception of what they should do in the situation. This study assessed 103 children in grades 3-7, both regular and special education populations from a suburban county in a midwestem state. Researchers have recommended that future studies concerning abuse prevention examine individual factors that may contribute to variations in children's ability to learn prevention concepts (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992; Krents, 1987). Therefore, this study examined how individual characteristics of sex, grade level, and educational status related to acquisition of these concepts. These factors were selected for study because they were found to affect acquisition of prevention knowledge in previous research. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) found that children in lower grades had more difficulty acquiring certain prevention concepts when compared to children in higher grades. The research results regarding gender effects and acquisition of prevention knowledge varied and further study of the effects of this factor was recommended (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). Krents et al. (1987) stated that children in special education may not acquire the same knowledge regarding prevention concepts as their peers in regular education. An examination of the effects of these individual characteristics on acquisition of prevention knowledge may provide helpful insights into curriculum development and teaching strategies for children in these groups. The effects that vignette characteristics of adult familiarity and child gender had on acquisition of recognition and avoidance competencies were examined. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) stated that children were better able to recognize abuse in situations where the adult was a stranger. It is important to determine if children are having difficulty recognizing potential abuse in situations with known adults, since the largest percentage of perpetrators are known to the child (Finkelhor et al., 1993). Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) also stated that children were better able to recognize potential abuse when the child in the abusive situation was a female. It is important to determine if children are having difficulty recognizing potential abuse when the child in the situation is a male, since males are also victims of abuse. An examination of the effects of these situational characteristics on acquisition of prevention knowledge may provide helpful insights into curriculum development and teaching strategies for children with these misconceptions. The Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy can be utilized by educators to evaluate more effectively acquisition of these prevention concepts. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) reviewed 25 studies which evaluated child sexual abuse prevention programs. They concluded that, in general, these evaluations were superficial. Program evaluations need to demonstrate that learning in this area is not simply rote parroting of ideas, but that children can apply these prevention concepts in real life situations. The strategy developed and implemented by this study requires children to go beyond rote repetition of ideas and requires them to apply the prevention concepts they learned to novel written scenarios presented in the form of vignettes. In addition, the scenarios depicting potential abuse all involve some form of coercion, which is the method potential abusers most often use to trick children into unwanted behaviors (Goleman, 1993). The Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy can also be utilized to elicit and describe children's acquired prevention knowledge regardless of the specific prevention program implemented. This strategy was based on the core prevention education concepts found in most child sexual abuse prevention curricula in order to be applicable across programs. Research Questions The following research questions were designed to examine children's acquisition of recognition and prevention competencies. 1. How well are children able to recognize potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing potentially abusive and non-abusive situations? 2. How well are children able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing potentially abusive and non-abusive situations? 3. What impact do vignette characteristics of adult familiarity and child gender have on acquisition of recognition and avoidance competencies respectively? 4. What impact do individual characteristics of sex, grade level, and educational status have on acquisition of recognition and avoidance competencies, respectively? Hypotheses The following hypotheses were constructed from these research questions and based on the literature review that follows. Hymtheses Regarding Knowledge-Based Competencies to Rm ze Potential Abuse Description of Recognition Comtencies bv Vignettes Hypothesis 1: Children's knowledge to recognize potential abuse will vary. Their knowledge to recognize potential abuse will depend on the situations represented in the vignettes. Effects of Sgific Vignette Chgracteristjcs on Recogflion Competencies Hypothesis 2: Children will be able to recognize potential abuse for vignettes with unknown adults better than with known adults. Hypothesis 3: Children will be able to recognize potential abuse for vignettes with female children better than with male children. Effects of Specific Subiect Characteristics on Reflmtion Competencies Hypothesis 4: There will be no effect of subject sex on knowledge to recognize potential abuse. Hypothesis 5: Children in higher grade levels will be able to recognize potential abuse better than children in lower grades. Hypothesis 6: Children in regular education subjects will be able to recognize potential abuse better than children in special education. Hypothesis 7: There will be an interaction effect of subject sex, grade, and educational status on knowledge to recognize potential abuse. Hmtheses Regarding Competencies to Avoid Potential Abuse Descripgion of Avm Comfipetencies by Vignettes Hypothesis 8: Children's knowledge to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse will vary. Their knowledge to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse will depend on the situations represented in the vignettes. Effects of Specific Vignette Characteristics on Avoidance Competencies Hypothesis 9 Children will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes with unknown adults better than with known adults. Hypothesis 10: Children will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes with female children better than with male children. Effects of Specific Sgbiect Chgacteristics on Avoidance Competencies Hypothesis 11: There will be no effect of subject sex on knowledge to avoid potential abuse. Hypothesis 12: Children in higher grade levels will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse better than children in lower grades. Hypothesis 13: Children in regular education will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse better than children in special education. Hypothesis 14: There will be an interaction effect of subject sex, grade and educational status on knowledge to avoid potential abuse. Definition of Terms Knowledge to Recoggize Potential Abuse Knowledge to recognize potential abuse is defined as children's ability to identify the presence of potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing potentially abusive situations, and to identify the absence of potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing non-abusive situations. Knowledge to Develop Strategies to Avoid Potential Abuse Knowledge to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse is defined as children's ability to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing potentially abusive situations, and to recognize there is no need to develop avoidance strategies when presented with vignettes representing non—abusive situations. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Five areas of research related to child sexual abuse were reviewed to develop and guide this study. These areas are prevalence, effects on children, risk factors, risk assessment, and prevention education. First, literature regarding the prevalence of child sexual abuse identifies the extent of the problem. Next, research regarding the effects of sexual abuse helps explain why it is important to address this high prevalence. The next area presents factors identified in the literature that increase a child's risk to sexual abuse and provides insight for improving prevention endeavors. The literature regarding risk assessment provides a review of existing methods utilized to assess risk in this and related areas. The last section, on sexual abuse prevention education, summarizes the literature in the specific area of prevention addressed by this study. Prevalence of Child Sexual Abuse The first segment of the review focuses on literature regarding the prevalence and incident rate of child sexual abuse. The second segment reviews literature that explored the methodological problems of research concerning prevalence of child sexual abuse. Prevalren_ce a_r_rt_1 lncideM of Child Sexual Abuse Finkelhor, Hotaling, Lewis and Smith (1990) reviewed the First National Survey of adults in the general population conceming history of child sexual abuse. In a sample of 2,626 men and women over the age of 18 a prevalence of 27% among women and 16% among men was found. Baladerian (1991), Muccigrosso (1991) and Tobin (1992) cited statistics from studies dealing with incidence and prevalence of child sexual abuse. Child sexual abuse in the general population was found to be approximately 25% for females and 20% for males before the age of 18. Although the prevalence of child sexual abuse in the general population is high, studies have found the prevalence to be even higher for individuals with disabilities. These rates increased to 39% to 83% for females and to 16% to 32% for males with 10 developmental disabilities before the age of 18. Within the population of individuals with developmental disabilities, 85% to 99% of the perpetrators of these crimes were known to the victims, 97% of the aggressors were male, and 55% were incestuous. These researchers acknowledged that statistics in this area vary and are difficult to obtain, but concluded that persons with disabilities are more vulnerable to sexual abuse than those without disabilities. Despite the recognition of this population as being highly vulnerable to sexual abuse, there is little professional literature documenting their abuse. Tharinger, Harton and Millea (1990) stated that accurate statistics describing the prevalence of sexual abuse of people with disabilities do not exist; incidents are underreported and the rate is believed to be higher than statistieally stated. Sobsey (1992) reviewed research in the area of disability and child abuse to explore whether children with disabilities were at greater risk for abuse than children without disabilities. Methodological problems in these studies were cited, such as sampling problems, selection of control groups, and unreported cases of abuse for children with disabilities. These methodological problems may have clouded the results of these studies. Despite these methodological problems, the majority of studies indicated a substantial increase of risk for individuals with disabilities. It was accepted that the rate for individuals with disabilities was higher than that for the general population; the question remained how much higher. The prevalence ranged from 1 1/2 to 5 times greater depending on the methodology used to collect the data Kempton and Kahn (1991) provided an historical perspective of sexual abuse and people with intellectual disabilities. They stated that until the 1960's the sexuality of people with mental retardation was handled by denial and suppression. Sobsey, Gray, Wells, Pyper, Reimer-Heck and Cole (1991) developed an annotated bibliography which documented all of the critical work accomplished to 1991 in the area of sexual exploitation, abuse and neglect, and vulnerability among persons with disabilities. The work in this bin n.“ if! A» \ 11 document depicts the increase of awareness and acknowledgment of this important research area that is needed to decrease prevalence of sexual abuse in this population. Methodolog'cal Issues in Child Sexual Abuse Prevalence Research Painter (1986) presented a literature review of studies dealing with prevalence of child sexual abuse. She concluded that the reasons for the inconsistency of results from study to study were due to differences in sampling techniques and methodology. She also noted that most studies of the general population did not adequately represent individuals with various disabilities. Individuals who could not read or complete the survey due to a disability were likely to have been excluded from the sample (Painter, 1986). Sexual abuse is a very private issue for many people. Martin et a1. (1993) suggested that the divergent prevalence rates may reflect the difficulty of trying to gain inf onnation about a private act. They examined two methods of gathering information on incidence: written self -administered format and f ace-to.face interview. They concluded that there was not a clear advantage in disclosure rate of either, but the self -administered approach offered anonymity, while the interview allowed for more clarity of detail. They stated that the most important factor in gaining comprehensive data from either method was to formulate cleariy defined, unambiguous questions. Steward et al., (1993) and England and Thompson (1988) stated that clinical identifieation of child sexual abuse depends on effective interviewing. Fifective interviewing techniques need to be based on the child's developmental level and needs. They stated that information regarding the developmental stages of cognitive ability and memory are essential in order to structure developmentally appropriate interview questions, and necessary to obtain accurate information about abuse. They explored the issues of children being asked misleading questions and children lying about abuse. They concluded that developmentally appropriate interviewing can help tackle these problems. Wyatt and Peters (1986a) analyzed four representative studies and described how differences in methodology and sample characteristics may have contributed to the 12 variations in prevalence rates. They found that face-to-face interviews produced higher prevalence rates than self -administered questionnaires. There was higher prevalence in studies that asked multiple questions to query about specific types of abusive sexual behavior. The age range of subjects may have also influenced prevalence rates. Factors not found to influence prevalence rates were (a) use of random sampling techniques, (b) the area of the country in which the study was conducted, (c) the educational level of the subjects, and (c) the ethnic composition of the sample. Haugaard and Emery (1989) studied possible methodological influences on prevalence rate of child sexual abuse. They concluded that prevalence rates were affected by method of gathering data, and choice of sample. The lowest rate was found with mail surveys. The lack of a common definition of child sexual abuse added to the variation in estimates of prevalence rates (Haugaard & Emery, 1989; Wyatt & Peters, 1986; Bagley, 1990a, 1990b). A computerized questionnaire was utilized with young men to examine incidence of sexual abuse (Bagley & Genuis, 1991). Results indicated that this procedure allowed for more reeall than a written questionnaire. A significantly larger number of males preferred the computerized questionnaire over a written questionnaire or personal interview because they found it easier and felt they could be more honest. Bagley (19900) and Feldman et al. (1991) explored whether or not child sexual abuse was really increasing. Bagley's (1990c) results showed a decrease in prevalence, which was attributed to the numerous programs, social openness, media, and print of the topic. Feldman et al. (1991) compared prevalence in the 19705 and 1980s to the 19403. They concluded that the increase in rate of reporting is not due to changes in prevalence but is attributable to changes in legislation and social climate. ’rr3 w ..e leg. -,1 I l3 SEEM—81% The incidence of child sexual abuse is dramatically high, even more so for people with disabilities. A review of research regarding methodological issues of prevalence research concluded that the existing research methods may result in inaccurate estimates of prevalence rates, specifically, the rate may be higher than estimated. Sobsey (1992) stated that we know enough about prevalence rate and it is time for researchers to address the more practical question of how to prevent abuse and provide services to those who are abused. Effects of Child Sexual Abuse This section reviews literature regarding the effects of sexual abuse on the general population, and specifieally on individuals with disabilities. First, a theoretical framework for examining these effects is discussed. Next, methodological issues about reporting and interpreting effects in research are reviewed, and their implieations for this research are considered. Effects of Child Sexual Abuse in the General Populatio_n Finkelhor (1990) studied the early and long-term effects of child sexual abuse to update earlier work in this area (Finkelhor & Browne, 1985). He reported the initial effects of sexual abuse to include fear, anxiety, depression, anger, aggression, and sexually inappropriate behavior. He reported long-term effects to include depression, self - destructive behavior, anxiety, feelings of isolation and stigma, poor self-esteem, difficulty in trusting others, tendency toward revictimization, substance abuse, and social maladjustment. Some of these effects have been studied in greater detail. Greenwald, Leitenberg, Cado & Tarran (1990) examined how the experience of childhood sexual abuse is related to long-term psychologieal and sexual functioning in a nonclinical and nonstudent community sample of women. They found no difference in measures of self -esteem, sexual functioning, or satisfaction, but found a significantly higher number of other types of 14 symptoms including depression and anxiety. Spring & Friedrich (1992) studied the health risk behavior and medical sequela of childhood sexual abuse. They found that sexually abused women had significantly more medical problems, greater level of somatization, and more health risk behaviors (smoking, drinking, drug abuse and number of sexual partners) than nonabused women. They concluded that physicians need to develop nonthreatening ways to elicit past sexual abuse so they can offer treatment and help explain physical symptoms. Putnam (1993) found that children who were sexually abused could have dissociative disorders different from the normal transient dissociative episodes of childhood that decrease in adolescence and are low in adults. There is a great need for treatment and proper diagnosis in this area. Wyatt, Guthrie and Notgrass (1992) studied the effects of childhood sexual abuse and revictimization. They stressed the importance of treatment to help reduce the revictimization rate. Witchel (1991) examined the effects of childhood sexual abuse on college students. The results of this study indicated that campuses need to be aware of needs and challenges of sexual abuse survivors and provide programs to meet these needs. 'h I» l. 15 E_ffect_s of ChildLSegalg Abuse on Individuals with Disabilities Little is known about initial and long-term effects of sexual abuse on the emotional, psychological, or social development of victims with mental retardation (T haringer et al., 1990). Tharinger et al (1990) cited only one article in this area and attributed this paucity of research to the difficulty of assessing the impact of and the ongoing effects of sexual abuse on individuals with mental retardation. In general, little attention has been paid to the emotional, psychological, and personality development of this population. Even less is known about the relationship between personalin factors and emotional disturbance, although individuals with mental retardation are susceptible to the same range of behavioral and emotional disorders as non-intellectually impaired individuals (Tharinger et al., 1990). Few mental health professionals have focused their research or practice on the emotional development of persons with mental retardation as a group. Limited research indicates higher incidence of psychiatric disorders and emotional disturbance in this population; therefore, reactions to sexual abuse may be qualitatively different (T haringer et al., 1990). More research is needed in order to help identify signs of abuse in this population. There is equally little research in the area of treatment for this population. The goals of treatment may be the same as for nondisabled population, but the modalities may be different. For example, modalities for individuals with cognitive impairments may need to be more concrete and involve more repetition of concepts. Behavior modification and psychotropic medications have been used as treatment with this population more often than psychotherapy (Tharinger et al., 1990). Baladerian (1992) stated that children with mental disabilities can benefit from psychotherapy and there is a need for more therapists that are specifically trained to work with them. Sgroi (1989), Cohen (1992), and Griffiths, Quinsey and Hingsburger (1989) wrote about sexual abuse treatment for individuals with disabilities. They suggested that treatment nwds to be developmentally appropriate and community based. Effective treatment needs to 16 be designed to meet an individual '8 development needs. Community based treatment programs may help increase access to these programs for individuals with disabilities. Theoretical Framework for ExaminingEffects of Child Sexual Abuse Finkelhor (1990) stated that the conceptualization of sexual abuse symptoms as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PT SD) started in 1983. He believed that PTSD was too narrow a diagnosis to explain the wide array of symptoms associated with sexual abuse (Finkelhor, 1990). He explained that PT SD stresses the affective realm when with sexual abuse much of the trauma is in the cognitive realm, such as distorted cognitive maps about sex, family, and self -worth. Many sexual abuse victims do not have PTSD symptoms but do have other symptoms not addressed by this diagnosis. It is important to note that those that do not experience PTSD as adults are not necessarily less traumatized. Finkelhor (1990) asserts that theory underlying PT SD does not accurately adapt to the experience of sexual abuse. PTSD is assumed to be the result of a frightening overwhelming event; whereas, in sexual abuse, many children do not experience violence and fear but manipulation and misuse of authority. Sexual abuse is often more of a situation, process, or relationship than a traumatizing event (Finkelhor, 1990). Given these limitations, Finkelhor (1990) presented the "Four Traumagenic Dynamics Model,” a multifactorial and eclectic model for examining the effects of child sexual abuse. This model presumes that sexual abuse has a variety of different effects on four main areas of children's development, depending on the nature of the abuse. The first, Traumatic Sexualization, refers to the child's sexuality being shaped in a developmentally inappropriate and interpersonally dysfunctional way. The second, Betrayal, refers to the impact when the child discovers that someone whom they were vitally dependent on caused them harm. The third, Stigmatization, refers to the negative connotations of badness, guilt, and shame that are communicated to the child around these experiences that then become incorporated into the child's self -image. The fourth, Powerlessness, refers to desires and sense of efficacy that are continually contravened. There are a number of mechanisms that 17 may traumatize the child by distorting their cognitive and affective capacities, so when they try to deal with the world with these distortions, some of the symptoms and dysfunctional behavior that characterize victims of abuse are seen. Cole and Putnam (1992) provided a developmental framework for conceptualizing the specific effects of incest. This model offers an additional perspective for examining effects of abuse that involve incest. Methodological Issues in Effects of Sexual Abuse Research Many studies of the effects of sexual abuse have used correlational designs and retrospective reports of abuse (Briere, 1992). Briere (1992) stated that cross-sectional research in this area is problematic because abuse related symptomology can change across a life-span. However, few studies have employed longitudinal designs to study effects over time. Briere (1992) further points out the need to study the psychological functioning of children before and after abuse to discriminate between abuse-specific and abuse- concurrent or abuse-antecedent events. He asserts that information in three areas is needed in order to improve the validity of research results, and the attribution of findings to causal factors: (a) the premolestation functioning of sexually abused children and thus the extent to which abuse ”effects" represent at least partially preexisting risk factors or psychological disturbance; (b) the exact role of coexisting familial dysfunction and other forms of maltreatment; and (c) the impact of social or demographic factors as they moderate or exacerbate what are thought to be simple abuse effects (Briere, 1992). Obtaining and studying a large population sample in a longitudinal design, despite its importance, is rarely practical. Ideally, longitudinal studies are best but not practical. An alternative is to match recently abused children to nonabused group and follow them longitudinally, on a post-hoc basis, at least to study effects over time (Briere, 1992). The definition of sexual abuse used in research is another methodological issue which needs to be addressed. Briere (1992) stated that researchers need a standard , "1”)“ ”I Kinks“ I: '~ up- i ‘ ‘54.:- m r ludut‘ ”air ' I . _ p ‘ ‘1‘].qu - . a. 4 _ . r 1. v.1..flk‘ b...“ fig? time ~v ‘ '»Jg\ Q 18 definition of what does and does not constitute sexual abuse. Results from studies that examine the effects of abuse should be evaluated in terms of how abuse was defined. Reporter bias has been noted as a problem with sexual abuse research (Briere, 1992). For example, some victims who repress memories of their childhood victimization would be put in the non-abused group and obscure or confound between group differences. Also, passage of time may compromise accurate or complete recall of childhood abuse (e.g., older women reported less abuse than younger women). Some subjects may confabulate reports. Briere (1992) suggested three ways to reduce occurrence of confabulation: (a) independently collaborate abuse reports with other sources, (b) restrict study to abuse cases validated by the child protection or criminal justice systems, and (c) decrease the potential rewards of falsifying one's childhood history. Studies which compare a group that has been abused to a group that has not been abused and attribute the differences to abuse are vulnerable to inferential error (Briere, 1992; Hyland, Tsujimoto & Hamilton, 1993). It is difficult to decide which factors to match subjects on for comparison groups. Briere (1992) suggested that subjects representing abused and non-abused individuals be drawn from the same population such as university students or patients from a mental health center. Matching cannot be used to make two groups equivalent when the groups are not in fact equivalent. Hyland et al. (1993) stated that when using a comparison group of individuals that have not experienced childhood sexual abuse it is important to make sure they have not experienced a different trauma which may have similar effects to childhood sexual abuse. They suggested that researchers utilize a "no sexual trauma comparison group" that would exclude women who have experienced a trauma similar to child sexual abuse during adulthood, like adult rape. This could increase the sensitivity to detecting clinically relevant characteristics of child sexual abuse survivors. Briere (1992) reviewed measurement and statistical issues in sexual abuse effects research. He stated that many instruments used in abuse research lacked psychometric '..a— {4}» “ i, 5.“... .. .hn - ‘cu . ’ ~ Pr -' v; A? 1!: l9 evaluation. Studies need to evaluate the psychometric properties of instrumentation and use instruments that are both reliable and valid. Firm conclusions regarding effects of abuse should not be drawn from individual studies with such limited empirical properties. Briere (1992) noted that many of the studies in this area have insufficient statistical power because of small sample size. He argues that meta-analysis may be a helpful way to summarize results. Another problem has been the use of univariate analysis when multivariate analysis would be more appropriate. Many studies looked at the main effect of sexual abuse on psychological functioning. For example, Briere (1992) stated that it is important to examine the interaction effects of sexual abuse with physical and psychological maltreatment factors. Multivariate procedures can be used to consider these three f orms of abuse concurrently, since they usually occur together. However, he cautioned that obtaining a sufficient sample size needed with multivariate analysis to avoid misleading results can be difficult in this area. Need for thrther Researfir in the Area of Ef @o—f Child Sexual Abuse Finkelhor (1990) stated that there is a need for new directions in research concerning the effects of abuse. For example, few studies can be found in the literature concerning the impact of sexual abuse on boys, despite the fact that 1/4 to 1/3 of all victims are boys (Finkelhor, 1990). Studies that have been conducted on boys found effects more similar than different to those for girls. This was noted as surprising because of the importance of gender in the realm of sexuality. It was expected that there would be more differences on the behavioral and symptomatic level but they were not found. Finkelhor (1990) concluded that studies on the consequences of victimization on boys should be a high priority in research. As discussed in the previous section, more longitudinal research is needed in this area since most of the earlier studies were cross-sectional. Recent longitudinal studies have ‘L‘. .1... b._‘ ‘d. 20 shown that recovery does occur over time and there is a decrease in symptomology in the months following disclosure of abuse (Finkelhor, 1990). Future research needs to examine why most studies in this area find some victims that do not show symptomology. Finkelhor (1990) suggested possible explanations: (a) inadequate assessment techniques to detect symptoms, (b) subjects were in denial at the time of evaluation and will show symptoms later, and (c) they may have suffered less serious abuse and had adequate psychological and social resources to cope with the stress. Conclusions Child sexual abuse can have detrimental long-term effects including depression, self -destructive behavior, difficulty trusting others, substance abuse, and a tendency toward revictimization. More research regarding the effects of sexual abuse on boy and on individuals with disabilities is needed. The high prevalence rate and the detrimental effects of child sexual abuse necessitate improvement of prevention efforts. Factors Associated with Increased Risk for Child Sexual Abuse This section will first examine factors that have been associated with increased risk to child sexual abuse for the general population, and a theoretical framework for examining these factors will be presented. Next, factors specifically associated with increased risk in the population of individuals with disabilities will be presented, followed by a theoretical framework for analyzing these risk factors. The last section will present suggestions for f urthcr research needed in this area. EaLctors Assogtted wiLh Increased Risk in the General Populittim Finkelhor and Baron (1986) stated that the identification of groups of children at high risk for sexual abuse will allow us to focus prevention efforts where they are needed most It can also provide valuable new clues about the causes of sexual abuse. They stated that the ultimate goal should not be to protect high risk children from abuse, but to eliminate abusive behavior itself. p urvq «I . H... t‘.~ .1 r a. .l. t. N E H 5;. 3.. ... h .9! .t x u \\ 21 "Risk Factors” are factors whose presence is associated with an increased likelihood that disease will develop at a later time. Thus although the risk factors are presumed to precede the disease temporally, they are not necessarily causal factors. They are simply markers of higher susceptibility. Thus age, sex, or ethnicity may be risk factors without having any direct connection to etiology (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986, p. 69). Finkelhor and Baron (1986) and Finkelhor (1990) provided literature reviews of studies which identified risk factors associated with child sexual abuse. Each of these risk factors they identified is presented below, along with the cited literature. @1161 Sexual abuse was found to be higher in girls than boys. However, Finkelhor (1990) also stated that males have been overlooked in sexual abuse research and that sexual abuse of males has been underreported. 589 Most studies reviewed by these authors reported findings that children are more vulnerable to sexual abuse starting in the preadolescent period between the ages of 8 and 12. Patterns show an increase in vulnerability at ages 6 to 7, and another increase at the age of 10. Ages 10-12 appear to be years of particularly acute risk. Reported victimization at this age is more than double the average rate. However, Finkelhor and Baron (1986) caution that children below the age of 6 may have an easier time forgetting and repressing memories of abuse due to inadequate cognitive frameworks for interpreting their experiences, which may artificially deflate risk associated with this age. On the other hand, extrafamilial abuse was found to increase with children starting school (Main, Wehrspann, KIajner-Diamond, LeBaron, & Winder, 1986). 311mm Ethnicity has been examined as a possible risk factor of sexual abuse (Lindholm & Willey, 1986; Watt, 1990; Watt, 1985). There are conflicting findings regarding ethnicity «AI . Th ~\a~ ‘ S 22 and risk of sexual abuse. Lindholm and Willey (1986) analyzed 4132 reported cases of child abuse to determine whether there were different patterns of child abuse as a function of ethnic group status. They found variations among different ethnic groups in many aspects of child abuse, including characteristics of the perpetrator and the victim. Watt (1985) concluded that ethnicin cannot be ruled out as a risk factor for child sexual abuse. She found some aspects of abuse differed for African-American and White-American women. Watt (1990) compared Finkelhor's (1985) victimization process of sexual abuse to the victimization process of being an ethnic minority. She concluded that the victimization process is similar and researchers need to further examine the interaction effects of these two types of victimization. These researchers concluded that cultural differences need more systematic attention in studies of child abuse. Finkelhor (1990) concluded that research studies failed to find any African-American and White-American differences regarding abuse, but stated that the other ethnic groups needed more research. Social Isolation Social Isolation is another factor related to sexual abuse (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986; Finkelhor, 1990). More sexual abuse is reported in rural areas and in situations of increased social isolation. Sexual abuse victims seem to be isolated among their peers and lack closeness with their siblings. Women with two or fewer friends at the age of 12 had more experiences of sexual abuse. Finkelhor and Baron (1986) explained that if a child is socially isolated and has fewer friends, this may create a need for contact and friendship the sexual abuser may take advantage of. Social isolation may also be the result of past abuse. Family members who abuse may refuse to let the child have friends or the child may feel shamed and stigmatized and isolate more. Poor Parental Relationship Poor relationship or conflict with parents was a risk factor with one of the strongest connections to abuse. Finkelhor and Baron (1986) hypothesized that children with poor parental relationships received less supervision and were less well protected from predatory 23 adults. Abused girls were found to have received less sex education from their mothers. Poor parental relations may cause emotional disturbances in the child. If children are unhappy and emotionally deprived, or needy, they may be more conspicuous and more vulnerable to adult perpetrators. These children may be more amenable to the offers of friendship, appreciation, and material rewards that the offender may offer. Children with poor parental relationships may be less able to stand up for themselves and may be afraid to tell their parents of abuse because of fear that their parents will not be supportive. Alexander ( 1992) presented Attachment Theory as a useful conceptual framework for understanding the familial antecedents and long-term consequences of sexual abuse. She addressed the influence of f amily as a risk factor for the onset of sexual abuse and as a mediator of its long-term effects. A disturbance in attachment in any or all relevant family members is likely to be associated with diminished capacity to meet one's needs in appropriate ways, to monitor oneself or others, and to seek help to stop abuse. Insecure attachment may either help set the stage for sexually abusive behavior, or may interfere with its termination (Alexander, 1992, p. 189). Stepfathers seem to be perpetrators more often than natural fathers. In society there are less taboos against stepfather-stepdaughter sexual contact. Natural fathers may be more inhibited due to the period of parent-child bonding when the child was small (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). Marigold (1991) examined the social context in which sexually abusive child care providers came into contact with children and parents. Female perpetrators were mostly adolescents, selected by parents who were employed on a routine basis and paid a sum of money for their child care. Male perpetrators covered a wide range of ages and committed sexual abuse over a significantly broader range of situations; therefore, this is harder to predict. Male baby-sitters, who did a small proportion of child care, were responsible for almost five times the sexual abuse as female sitters. Li 24 Finkelhor and Baron (1986) stated that none of the risk factors associated with abuse bears a strong enough relationship to the occurrence of abuse that its presence alone could play a confirming or disconfirrning role in the identification of actual cases of abuse. They also concluded that there are no identifiable demographic or family characteristics of a child that can be used to exclude the possibility that a child has been sexually abused. It is suggested that these risk factors may be more useful as a guide to prevention than features that can be used in the actual detection of abuse (Finkelhor, 1990). Theoretical Framework for ExamininLRisk Factors for Qild Sexual Abuse While researching risk factors for child sexual abuse it is important not to fall into the trap of ”blaming the victim” for abuse. Most studies in the area of predicting or explaining child sexual abuse tend to emphasize the role of the victim and underemphasize the contribution of the perpetrator. Because offenders initiate sexual activity, it is important to remember in looking for risk factors that causal responsibility for the abuse lies with the offenders. Finkelhor and Baron (1986) suggested that risk factors be examined within the ”Four Preconditions Model of Sexual Abuse.” According to this model, the four preconditions needed for sexual abuse to occur are (a) an offender must have motivation to sexually abuse, (b) an offender must overcome internal inhibitions against abusing, (c) an offender must overcome external obstacles against abusing, and (d) an offender must overcome resistance by the child. The risk factors described in the above section relate to the last two preconditions. For example, situations that may reduce the supervision of the child may make it easier to overcome external obstacles to abuse. In addition, conditions that undermine children's emotional or physical health may reduce their ability to resist. Preconditions 3 and 4 only make a difference after preconditions 1 and 2 have already been met. They are relevant only when there is an offender who is predisposed to molest and has overcome internal inhibitions against doing so. Many children that suffer from risk factors r "5‘, n“ tam)» . A 4.3 F2039» paw-p! “ LL.» :1 b at fast) "WWI Oils i '- ‘. ma. '5 $ch ”Ann: 1 mm i...’ i 1‘“, $14,253 2531:} to E3 ‘:., Ni} ‘ in I'm. .47.» .. ~36? I A ‘ ixni‘fit A115) “3151 v l Stairs. 1 .‘ VH1 “4 abu {3(3' 1 a F D 25 at preconditions 3 and 4 may never experience abuse. By knowing risk factors for preconditions 3 and 4 we can design prevention programs for children and families at higher risk. For example, school personnel may want to target children who are socially isolated and have few friends for special attention. It is important that the search for these risk factors at levels 3 and 4 do not obscure the fact that these do not cause abuse. This is essential to keep this in mind so we do not fall into the trap of blaming the victim for abuse (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). Identified Riskjtctors for Sexua_l Abuse for Individuals with Dispbilities Baladerian ( 1991) presented a literature review concerning sexual abuse of people with disabilities. In general, children are dependent and helpless to overcome and avoid abuse, including children with disabilities. Some of these characteristics fade with growth and maturation as a child gains physical strength, mental ability, emotional strength, and community support to avoid and defend against abuse. Children with developmental disabilities also grow in these areas, but may continue to have severe impairments in their ability to understand abuse or to defend against new or continued offenses. Researchers have described factors which contribute to the vulnerability of children with disabilities to sexual abuse and exploitation (Krents, Schulman & Brenner, 1987; Tharinger, Horton, & Millea, 1990; Tobin, 1992; Crossmaker, 1986, 1991; Muccigrosso, 1991; Senn, 1983; Ammerman, 1992; Borko, 1992; Cohen & Warren, 1990; Womendez & Schneiderrnan, 1991; Waxman, 1991). Studies have been conducted to help describe the vulnerability of this population to sexual abuse ( Elvik, Berkowitz, Nicholas, Lipman & Inkelis, 1990; Sobsey & Doe, 1991; Mullan & Cole, 1991; Benedict, White, Wulff & Hall, 1990; Sullivan, Brookhouser, Scanlan, Knutson & Schulte, 1991). The risk factors for sexual abuse that were identified in this literature for individuals with disabilities are described below. 26 Type japdieverity of Disabilitl Sobsey (1992) reviewed studies dealing with the relationship of type and severity of disability and increase in risk for abuse. He concluded that the nature and extent of disability appeared to be a poor predictor of risk. It seemed logical that if disability increased risk then the greater the disability the greater the risk, but no clear patterns were seen consistently in these studies. Cohen and Warren (1990) stated that disability and child abuse were interwoven. In some cases abuse caused a disability and in other cases a disability led to abuse. Benedict et al. (1990) studied severity of disability as a risk factor for maltreatment. They found that children with more severe functional impairments were at less risk for maltreatment than marginally functioning children. They explained that people were more willing to accept age-inappropriate behavior from children with severe impairments and expected age-appropriate level of behavior from those with mild to moderate impairments. They were less patient with children who had less obvious impairments. Child functional and developmental characteristics were not confirmed as risk factors for substantiated maltreatment reports. Mullan and Cole (1991) examined providers' perceptions of the vulnerability of persons with disabilities to sexual exploitation. Professionals perceived different types of disabilities as posing different risks of exploitation. Demndency on Caregivers Long-term dependency on caregivers may cause a person to readily follow the directions of supposedly nurturing adults. This dependency may place them in situations of unusual trust and enhance the possibility of abuse (Tharinger et al., 1990). Children with disabilities are of ten dependent on care providers who are often perpetrators (Krents et al., 1987). Complete dependence on caretakers for much of daily living doesn't support the development of independence skills. When children have decisions made for them, they are not as involved in developing sound judgment or practicing how to make decisions about who to spend time with and how to handle certain situations. Caretakers may find it easier 27 to do things for them instead of teaching them to do for themselves (Muccigrosso, 1991). They may be dependent on assistance with daily activities such as toileting and bathing and may fear losing this care if they try to prevent this abuse (Tobin, 1992). mydv Powerless Position in Society When people are subjected to discrimination or demeaning attitudes their vulnerability to sexual abuse increases. Offenders usually do not abuse people who are respected and seen as equal. It may not be the actual disability that contributes to the risk, but a function of society's expectations and treatment of individuals with disabilities (Crossmaker, 1991). Waxman (1991) stated that hatred is an unacknowledged dimension in violence against people with disabilities; that is, societal hatred is the primary cause of violence, rather than their physical condition. Inadguate Education Regarding Sexuality a_nd Sexual Abuse Tharinger, Horton and Millea (1990) stated that among individuals with mild to moderate mental retardation, sexual development and sexual interest occur at approximately the same age as within the nondisabled population. However, individuals with this disability have little opportunity to understand their sexuality and to explore their sexual curiosity, and thus may become an easy target for sexual abuse. Many believe that individuals with disabilities are asexual and do not need to be educated about sexuality. In reality, their sexual drive and development is not different from nonhandicapped peers and they require the same educational information. In many cases they do not receive prevention education or it is taught without a foundation of basic sex education. Children segregated into special education classes may not receive the same sexual abuse information as their nondisabled peers. If they are mainstreamed they may have this education, but at a level that they cannot comprehend Without appropriate education they may be less likely to understand the inappropriateness of an abusive situation (Krents et al., 28 1987). They may not know what abuse is and may be unable to stop it if they do not understand that it is happening to them (Muccigrosso, 1991). Children with developmental disabilities need to receive sex education as well as abuse education. They need to learn about positive touching and sexuality so they can assimilate information about negative touching and abuse more easily (Tobin, 1992). More research is needed to design prevention curriculum and instructional methods that best meet the needs of individuals with developmental disabilities. Wu: Communicaflr Sfllp A person with a physical disability may make an attractive target for offenders because they may be weaker or may not be able to report abuse or identify the abuser. They may be unable to disclose the abuse because of a communication impairment even if they realize that the abuse is inappropriate (Ammerman, 1992). Sullivan et al. (1991) studied communicatively impaired children and concluded that they are particularly vulnerable because of their limited ability to report abuse. Morton (1992) described the use of facilitative communication for those individuals that cannot speak as a way to report abuse. In their study of boys with communication impairments, 97% of the perpetrators were trusted people known to the victim. Their results suggested that handicapped males were more likely to be abused than nonhandicapped peers in the general population, and children in residential schools were sexually abused more often than those that were mainstreamed. Womendez and Schneiderrnan (1991) wrote specifically of the unique problems of women with disabilities who have been battered and abused. They suggested that woman with physical disabilities may be easier targets for abuse because they may not be able to readily remove themselves from the abusive situation. Emotional and Social Insecurities Children with disabilities may feel the need to have friends in the "normal" population. Their quest for acceptance may make them especially vulnerable to coercion since they may do almost anything that they believe or are told will help them f it in with the Near Mandi). ll U wont-no w ‘\Sys..ls .2 I 51 72' a mix! sub! L\,’l‘. 1L '2' T ',.' hfl‘ L n. j r y. ”I w Manse?“ I556 ‘sl Ufi .. tr belie: Rcse 'i.- . g “5 ilk 0i \ it let. 19 Mid b\ The Wine 29 ”normal" crowd. Their emotional and social insecurities raise their vulnerability (Tharinger et al., 1990). Less Attent_ion from Family Members and Less Social Interaction with Friends and Neighbors Children with disabilities may be less likely to develop real friendships and intimacy, which may result in a sense of social deprivation. This could lead to an individual accepting professed affection and attention from people who are really not friends and who may exploit them (Muccigrosso, 1991). These children need attention like all children and may be more accepting of a sexual relationship as a form of attention or friendship (Tharinger et al., 1990). yprgalgsuc View gi_at Everyone is Their Friend Muccigrosso (1991) stated that children with disabilities may be protected from the outside world influences and develop a very trusting nature about everyone and everything. Their belief that everyone can be trusted and that everyone is a friend can be very unsafe (Muccigrosso, 1991). Researchers have used the Glen Ridge Sexual Assault Case as a specific example of this type of vulnerability of people with mental disabilities to sexual abuse (Ames, 1991; Garwick, 1993). A 17 year old woman who is mildly mentally impaired was sexually assaulted by a group of nondisabled high school men who she considered her "friends.” These vulnerabilities were delineated and prevention suggestions were given. Low Self -E§teem Muccigrosso (1991) stated that Clemes and Bean's Theory of Self -Esteem suggests that there are four essential components to develop high self esteem: (a) connectedness, (b) acknowledgement of uniqueness, (c) appropriate models, and (d) power. Individuals with disabilities may be lacking in these areas (Muccigrosso, 1991). According to Muccigrosso (1991), individuals with developmental disabilities usually do not have a sense of power VIA- is. \HH . 30 over their lives. They may be prime targets for sexual abuse because they are used to having others run their lives. Inadguate Sense of Body Boundaries and Sense of Ownership of Their Bodies Children with disabilities may be physically intruded upon by caregivers, doctors, nurses, therapist, and attendants (Tobin, 1992). They may not know they have the right to say no to being touched (Tobin, 1992). Inadguate Asserpveness a_rrflver-Compliapce with Authority Assertiveness may not be reinforced for individuals that require caretakers because it is easier to care for a person that is very cooperative. They may not have practice saying no when it is advisable to do so. Some children may be taught that it is never OK to say no to an adult and this may lead to learned helplessness. Therefore, they may not know they have the right to say no to the touch of an adult abuser (Tobin, 1992). Children with disabilities may be taught to obey authority because people in authority, such as doctors, nurses, and therapists are presented as knowing what is best for them. This can cause them to be more easily manipulated (Tobin, 1992). Public Denial and Disbelief Borko (1992) stated that children are not viewed as credible witnesses, and children with disabilities are seen as even less credible. This can make them a more favorable target for abuse. Society may not want to believe that individuals with disabilities could be victims of sexual abuse. Children with physical disabilities may be seen as less credible as victims because they are not seen as sex objects. This population may be seen as confused or needy of attention, and therefore found to be more suspicious of confabulating stories about being abused (Tobin, 1992). Institutionalization Crossmaker (1991) described institutional sexual abuse. She stated that power and its use or abuse are pivotal issues in both sexual abuse and institutionalization. Sexual assault dynamics, attitudes toward people with disabilities, and the dynamics of 31 institutionalization merge to create an environment where institutionalized individuals are at significant risk for sexual abuse. Elvik et al. (1990) studied the vulnerability of institutionalized adult women with developmental disabilities to sexual abuse. They concluded that this population is particularly vulnerable because, like children, regardless of their age they may not be able to relate details of the abusive event. Theoretical Frameworka or Anafizipg Risk for Sexual Abuse for _I_n_dividuals with Disabilities Crossmaker ( 1986) presented a theoretical f rarnework for analyzing the vulnerability of individuals with developmental disabilities to sexual abuse. She suggested that vulnerability to sexual abuse should be analyzed in three main areas: (a) isolation, (b) lack of information, and (c) powerlessness and dependency. Sobsey and Doc (1991) analyzed patterns of sexual abuse and assault from 162 reports of victims with disabilities. Sexual abuse was high in the population with disabilities. They presented the "Ecological Model of Abuse" which considered interacting factors at three different levels. The microsystemic level focused on the offender and victim interaction. The macrosystemic level focused on the influential social context in which these interactions took place, like the family or an institution. The exosystemic level focused on cultural influence and social beliefs that interacted with the other two levels. The mesosystemic level focused on the interaction of all three levels described above. They presented this as a model for understanding sexual abuse of individuals with disabilities. The interaction between the offender and the victim was characterized by inequality of power, but this inequality could only be understood by considering the environment in which they interacted, and the cultural milieu in which they existed. At the exosystemic level, perceived passivity of women and children may be exaggerated by social reaction to disability. People with disabilities were seen as weak and passive and taught to be compliant. At the macrosystemic level people with disabilities may be isolated more often in homes or institutions. u e“‘ ‘k 32 Need for PM Resgrch Concernipg Risk Factors For Child Sexual Abuse Researchers agreed that there is a need to look at other risk factors (Finkelhor, 1990; Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). Another important line of research is to look more closely at the characteristics of children themselves, as opposed to their families or social environments. Little research has been done to see whether children with certain individual characteristics might be at increased risk or decreased risk for abuse. Some of the individual factors which need to be examined include (a) personality and temperamental characteristics such as passivity, aggressiveness, introversion, and extroversion; (b) physical characteristics such as size, weight, strength, and attractiveness; (c) psychological characteristics such as self -esteem and locus of control; and (d) cognitive factors such as the level of child's sex education; understanding of child molestation; beliefs about adults, obedience and their own rights; and intelligence and coping skills to avoid sexual victimization (Finkelhor, 1990; Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). More detailed studies are needed of various subgroups that may be at higher risk for sexual abuse, such as children with emotional difficulties or other types of disabilities that directly impair their ability to recognize and avoid abuse. In many studies childhood is considered as a single stage. Researchers need to look at risk factors by developmental stages. Different risk factors create vulnerability at different stages of childhood. Children's needs and their environments change with different developmental stages, so it is possible that risk factors for each stage could also change (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). Multivariate analysis is needed in order to address more complex questions which involve the effects of multiple risk factors. Risk Assessment for Child Sexual Abuse Caldwell, Bogat and Davidson (1988) examined the current status of assessment of risk for child abuse. They presented a framework for examining the causes of child abuse. This model included four ecological levels for examining abuse. The ontogentic level ’fl ‘Al \lr IA‘ "1 H ; .‘J 3.. 1“ 33 focuses on the individual. Research on ontogentic development stresses the unique psychological characteristics of parents who abuse or the characteristics of the child victim that might increase risk for abuse. The microsystemic level focuses on the family. Research at this level differentiates between abusive and nonabusive families by certain characteristics of the marital relationship or interaction between parents and children. The exosystemic level focused on the community. Research at this level focuses on various social structure variables (e.g., poverty, households headed by women) that have been associated with higher rates of abuse within communities. The macrosystemic level focuses on cultural variables. Research at this level stresses that child abuse results from the isolation created by our individualistic culture, the reduced sense of community responsibility for children, and the social and economic stresses under which some people live. Caldwell et al. (1988) stated that, given this range of different factors implicated in the etiology of child abuse, researchers are faced with the decision about how to assess child abuse risk. They noted the lack of a risk assessment procedure that adequately incorporates etiological variables at all four ecological levels. Theoretically, a multilevel assessment procedure is attractive, but practically it may not be necessary to measure abuse risk at all levels simultaneously. An assessment procedure that focuses on one ecological level may be adequate for some purposes. If the major purpose of risk assessment is to deliver prevention services in the most efficient manner, then the ecological level at which one assesses risk should correspond to the ecological level at which prevention services are delivered. For example, prevention at the Exosystemic level would focus on the entire community; therefore, everyone in the community would receive prevention education through a community-wide public awareness campaign. A positive aspect of this level of prevention is that abusers are not labeled and singled out A negative aspect is that people who would never abuse receive services so it is not cost efficient. For cost efficiency and u t our 3311;: 233:2 23.. 3311131 tears 1 SEC Chit Kielei ; ”mi 00:1; " “151T; “‘1 u at J. IJM, Till. 1 trains in that c. Current n effluent) time it cur 53.131 Ca Grimm SIB. 311' Eli tn 34 out of clinical tradition, most prevention programs focus on individual intervention for individuals or families and not communities and cultures. The problem with this approach is that it is assumed that potential abusers can be accurately identified. Ontogentic and microsystemic level prevention systems are based on the belief that abusive parents differ from nonabusive parents. Instruments have been developed to measure the risk to commit child abuse such as the Michigan Screening Profile of Parenting and Child Abuse Potential Inventory (Caldwell et al., 1988). Caldwell et al. (1988) believed that these instruments should not be called "risk assessment” instruments because only concurrent validity has been determined and predictive validity has not been demonstrated. A macrosystemic level of risk assessment is the same as descriptive epidemiology which maps incidence rate over different segments of the population and gives information on where to focus prevention (Caldwell et al., 1988). Caldwell et al. (1988) identified problems in risk assessment methodology. Predictive validity can only be established by using prospective methodology; therefore, longitudinal studies are needed. Child abuse must be clearly defined in order effectively to identify risk factors associated with it At this point, the research in this area lacks consensus on an operationalized and reliable definition of child abuse. Without agreement on what constitutes the occurrence of child abuse, accuracy of prediction is difficult Current risk assessment procedures provide only a relatively small increase in program efficiency; therefore, the cost of using them must be evaluated carefully. Problems of false positive identification can cause human suffering and legal liability. False negatives can cause systems to overlook people that need services. Caldwell et al. (1988) concluded that assessment of child abuse potential, in its current state, is not a powerful aid in the efforts to prevent child abuse. Instead, he argues that, given the multiplicity of potential risk factors involved, prevention services designed e ‘N ‘5: i... m 35 to promote healthy, nonabusive interaction between parents and children should be delivered to the widest possible audiences. Researchers have discussed various methods for assessing risk of child abuse. Caliso and Milner (1992) examined the effects of childhood history of abuse on adult child abuse potential. Chantler, Pelco and Mertin (1993) used Human Figure Drawings and the Louisville Behavior Checklist to detect victims of child sexual abuse. Goldsmith (1990) presented a pilot risk assessment instrument in the form of a structured interview which is based on risk factors for spouse abuse. Waterman and Lusk (1993) examined the empirical literature to explore the usefulness of various psychological tests in evaluating allegations of child sexual abuse. De Young (1986) provided a conceptual model for judging the truthfulness of a young child's allegations of sexual abuse. Ammerman and Hersen (1990) stated that identifying characteristics that differentiate high from low-risk families and children is a priority in future research to help direct prevention measures. Yungman and Hegar (1986) stated that it is important for professionals working with school age children, such as social workers, to be able to detect and know signs of child abuse because school-age children are most frequently the target of sexual abuse. They provided useful information which could be integrated into the development of a prevention program, including (a) male victims often deny abuse, (b) children are more comfortable interviewing with a person of the same sex, (c) programs need parental support, and (d) prevention goals should be to increase awareness, decrease vulnerability, and promote disclosure. Prevention should be integrated into the whole school cuniculum in areas such as health, safety, and psychology. Wald and Woolverton (1990) and Doueck, Bronson and Levine (1992) discussed the use of risk assessment systems in Child Protection Services. They concluded that current risk assessment devices have major methodological deficiencies that limit the utility of such instruments as a means of predicting future abusive behavior. In the hands of an unskilled worker, such a device can do more harm than good. Intervention should focus on 36 needs assessment rather than on risk assessment. Instruments should be used as a means of improving clinical judgment, not as an actuarial device. They should be used to teach workers to focus on particular factors, as a guideline to focus their thinking, and a screening tool for services needed. Conclusions This section presented factors associated with increased risk to child sexual abuse. These factors include poor parental relationship, social isolation, age, and gender. Specific factors associated with increased risk to abuse for children with disabilities include dependency on caretakers, inadequate sense of body boundaries and sense of ownership of their bodies, and inadequate education regarding sexuality and sexual abuse. Identification of groups of children at high risk for sexual abuse can help to focus prevention efforts where they are needed most. This study addresses the risk factor of inadequate sexual abuse prevention knowledge. An examination of children's acquired abuse prevention knowledge can help identify children that are at risk due to inadequate knowledge in this area. This information can be used to improve curriculum design and instructional methods aimed at reducing the risk associated with inadequate prevention education. Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Education This section presents a review of abuse prevention education for the general population and specifically for children with disabilities. A review of the core concepts for sexual abuse prevention education follows. Prevenp'on Education Relating to the General Populam During the past five years, studies regarding the effectiveness of school-based child sexual abuse prevention programs have increased greatly. Hazzard et al. (1991) studied the effectiveness of a school-based child sexual abuse prevention program. They evaluated the immediate effect of the program as well as a one-year follow-up evaluation. The results showed that some children did not retain prevention knowledge after one year. They l 0/ T“ .\.L" 1 ‘1 ‘s . In- 37 concluded that prevention information needs to be reinforced throughout the years for children to retain and integrate information from these programs. Finkelhor, Asdigian and Dziuba-Leatherman (1993) conducted the National Youth Victimization Prevention Study. This study involved telephone interviews of a nationally representative sample of 2000 youths aged 10— 16 and their caretakers. Three goals of this study were (a) to explore children's exposure to sexual abuse prevention education , (b) to study the quality of the prevention education received, and (c) to determine the effectiveness of these programs. Of the 2000 children interviewed, 67% were exposed to a school-based prevention education sexual abuse program and more than 37% were exposed to such a program in the past year. In their review of prevention programs that varied widely, most programs contained core concepts including (a) awareness of the prevalence and nature of abuse, (b) instruction to say no or otherwise escape unwanted overtures and threats, (c) encouragement to tell an adult about the episodes, and (d) assurance that the incidents were not their fault. Programs containing this core content gained rapid acceptance in the school curriculum around the United States. Finkelhor et al.(1993) cited a 1990 survey of 440 randomly selected elementary school districts which found that 85% of the schools offered instruction in these core concepts and 64% of the schools mandated the instruction. However, they found that the specific content and quality of these programs varied greatly. The researchers used 12 items that were judged by most prevention educators to be important components of a quality program. Two examples of these items were provided, instruction that abusers can be known people such as relatives, and repetition of the program on more than a single occasion. Only 33% of the children were exposed to a program containing nine or more of these components, which were labeled more comprehensive programs. In addition, Finkelhor, et a1. (1993) studied the impact of exposure to these programs on children's knowledge about victimization, as well as on the strategies they used in real encounters to avoid and cope with attempted victimization. Their findings \ .n.‘ I ins. .JL.. ‘5. "' 38 suggested that children who were exposed to more comprehensive prevention programs (a) performed better on a short test of knowledge about sexual victimization, (b) were more likely to use the kinds of self -protection strategies recommended by prevention educators when victimized or threatened , (c) were more likely to disclose to someone about the attempts when victimized or threatened , and (d) were more likely to feel they were successful in protecting themselves when victimized. It was noted that comprehensive parental instruction had positive effects on children's knowledge, coping skills, and inclination to disclose. Some of the recommendations based on results from this study included (a) that the general quality of prevention programs needs to be improved, (b) that more emphasis is needed in the area of parental instruction, and (c) that more effort is needed to understand how children actually thwart victimizations (Finkelhor et al., 1993). Goleman (1993) interviewed researchers involved in the study of sexual abuse prevention education. He concluded that the best programs incorporated sexual abuse prevention into more general training in social skills, for example, teaching assertiveness and self confidence. The newer programs also addressed a broader range of psychological and social skill training including conflict resolution, empathy, anger management, and impulse control. Goleman (1993) also concluded that effective programs must help children recognize that enticement or coercion may signal something dangerous. He concluded from his review of research that approximately half of the school-based programs were judged to be inadequate and needed improvement. Suggestions for improving programs included more parental involvement and exposing children more frequently to this information. Berrick (1988) studied the effectiveness of parent training. Results indicated that parents learned very little of what was presented in the program, but there was an increase in interaction with the child concerning this topic. He also points out that it is important to remember when working with parents that they could be perpetrators. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) reviewed 25 studies that evaluated child sexual abuse prevention programs. The four common concepts they found in most prevention curricula 9‘ x0.“ I. r u- H F . ‘ .v . F r‘ ».rh;5. “‘2 . h- . . ~. . ‘rur I‘ am ,7 39 were the following: (a) there are different types of touches: good, bad , and confusing; (b) children need to refuse overtures from strangers and known pe0ple to touch private parts of the body; (c) children must remove themselves from dangerous situations; and (d) children should tell an adult when these situations occur (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). In addition to the four common concepts, a wide variety of other concepts were included in various prevention curricula: (a) it is not the child's fault if anything does happen, (b) known people can be abusers as can strangers, (c) it is important to build self -esteem and social well-being, and ((1) information about positive touch and caring should be included with inf orrnation about bad and confusing touches (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). Researchers examined children's acquisition of these prevention concepts (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). They concluded that some concepts are easily learned by most children, and other concepts are more difficult for children to learn. Children tended to learn to differentiate between abusive and non-abusive behaviors, yet they had difficulty grasping the concept that abuse can come from known adults. Children were found to have particular difficulty retaining two concepts, (a) that they should not keep secrets regarding abusive behavior, and (b) that abuse was not their fault. Results from these studies also indicated that some children learned the concepts better than others. In general, older children learned better than younger children. Research regarding gender cf fects and learning were varied; therefore, no conclusions regarding gender differences were drawn other than that more research is needed in this area (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). The method of instruction was shown to affect the learning of prevention concepts. Programs that utilized more passive instructional methods, such as f ilmstrips and lectures, were less effective when compared to programs that included more engaging instructional methods, such as role plays. The duration of instruction and amount of repetition of concepts were also found to affect learning. Programs with longer duration and more repetition were more effective (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). firm any; ._ .1...“ e: _‘ ‘ "be, I . . \"' - it.-. 1 ~ ..‘~ ,1". j K ‘ - g . § ‘\ .’- ‘ . 1::- H ”L _7 5'. A a fi' ' \4‘ 40 Parental training was found to be an effective method to increase disclosures from children about abusive incidents they encountered. They concluded that prevention efforts need to focus on parents, adults, and potential abusers in addition to children. It was suggested that it would be advantageous to interview molesters to learn how to more effectively prevent them from making advances. The findings among these studies agreed that some children have more difficulty learning prevention concepts than others, and that some concepts are more difficult to learn. However, these studies have not made it clear how children learn and retain these concepts or how often concepts need to be repeated. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) concluded that it would be more effective to look at children individually, rather than solely as a group, to help understand why some children do not learn and retain these concepts (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). Throughout the inception of prevention education, there have been people concerned with possible negative effects of this type of education. The results from this review concluded that, in general, programs did not have negative effects on children. These programs were found to reduce children's fears and increase their confidence regarding this topic. In contrast, one study found that some children were more fearful of non-exploitative situations after exposure to the prevention program (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). The methodology used to evaluate prevention programs was reviewed. In general, evaluations of prevention programs were viewed to be superficial. Finkelhor and Strapko argue that these evaluations need to demonstrate that this learning is not simply a rote parroting of ideas, but that children can demonstrate that they can apply these concepts in role plays and in imaginary situations. For example, children should be required to demonstrate that they can recognize potential harm when presented with vignettes representing potentially abusive situations. However, they also conclude that the more effective methods of determining if these programs are effective involve ethical concerns, {1'3" .vb— ‘ 2.-.... E par. 7 . p . a. h 0'. . " e-a-ibt s i‘. . an 41 including (a) whether and how to get parental permission to interview children who have been abused, (b) how to prevent trauma in interviewing, and (c) how to handle reporting requirements during interviewing when the intent was not to disclose an unsuccessful attempt to abuse (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). Evaluations of prevention programs were found to deemphasize the important role prevention education plays in decreasing the trauma of abuse that has occurred. Many program evaluations failed to acknowledge this important aspect of prevention education. If children learn the concept that abuse is not their fault, it may reduce the trauma experienced by abuse. Programs were also found to be effective in increasing disclosure and immediate reporting of incidents. Finkelhor and Suapko (1992) suggested relabeling these programs as ”sexual abuse prevention education and disclosure programs." Melton (1993) suggested that one method for improving prevention programs is to incorporate insights from cognitive development and feminist theories into the design of prevention cunicula. More information is needed to determine the age at which children are best able to absorb different concepts and lessons about prevention. Feminist theory can help prescribe the skills and knowledge that children should possess to protect themselves; theories of cognitive development can reveal the extent to which children can master these lessons in light of their developmental level. A combination of both types of theories might provide the best insight into creating prevention curricula that can more effectively meet the needs of children (Melton, 1993). Krivacska (1990) and Benick and Gilbert (1991) studied the effectiveness of school-based prevention programs. They concluded that empowerment of children through prevention education is important, but not sufficient to protect children. Increasing family and community responsibility for protection of its most vulnerable members should also be an integral part of prevention efforts. ‘_J L'.' 1" F? 1 TN a... A l 42 Prevention Ed_t&ti0n R_elating Specifically to Individuals with Disabilities Summer (1987), Crossmaker (1988), and Walker-Hirsch and Champagne (1991) reviewed abuse prevention programs for individuals with disabilities. They suggested that prevention programs should help foster comfort in discussing sexuality by presenting positive information about sexuality that is appropriate to the child's age and maturity. This will give the child the basis for understanding the difference between appropriate and inappropriate behavior and provide the necessary terms to describe an abusive event should it occur. One suggestion was to help children identify private parts of their bodies in a positive light, without shame or disapproval (Krents, Schulman, & Brenner, 1987). Educators should use accurate and clear information because it is more easily comprehensible than childish euphemisms and vague pictures. Euphemisms imply an embarrassing reluctance that can leave the children with a negative impression of their own sexuality and gender (Krents etal., 1987). Stavis (1991) cautioned that prevention programs need to balance the right to sexual expression and the right to protection from harm for persons with mental disabilities. Prevention education should be designed to enhance sexual development and expression, not to stifle it. The important role of parents in the prevention education process was emphasized by Krents et al. (1987). Programs need to include information for parents so they can reinforce the skills that the child learns in school. Parents need to be aware of signs of abuse to help with detection (Krents et al., 1987). Education needs to start early with parents of children with developmental disabilities so they can be taught how to foster independence (Muccigrosso, 1991). Fitz-Gerald and Fitz-Gerald (1987) discussed the importance of parental involvement in the sex education of their hearing impaired children. Parents need to take an active role because these children may not get as much information from peers as nonhearing impaired children might. Some parents may feel uncomfortable with issues of r I ,4 I‘ . o‘e‘.‘ 4-’ . as. ai»\ «A' A .‘ v a, HP gr 1" ‘Al - a “ r,‘ "In ‘8 43 sexuality, so prevention programs should address this and provide support for parents so they can feel comfortable and then help their children in this area (Pendler & Hingsburger, 1991). Krents et al. (1987) recommended that parents should not react to prevention education with placing restrictions on children's activities and forbidding contact with strangers. This recommendation was made because 80%-90% of sexual abuse occurs with people who are well known to the child, and restricting contact with strangers could lead to greater dependency on family members and caretakers, lower self -esteem, and make children reluctant to make new friends among peers. This recommendation is in line with a major goal for individuals with disabilities, to reduce dependency and foster independence. The prevention programs need to be evaluated to see if they are meeting the special needs of children with disabilities (Muccigrosso, 1991). Tobin (1992) suggested that specific prevention needs of children should be included in their Individualized Educational Plan. Cole (1991) stressed that there were few sex education training programs for professionals working with individuals with disabilities. She stated that programs must be tailored to meet the unique needs of people with different types of disabilities. People with congenital versus acquired, or stable versus progressive, or early versus late onset disabilities need to be evaluated to determine unique educational needs. Other suggestions included the use of group format to enhance attitudes and social- sexual skills of people with deveIOpmental disabilities (Ragg & Rowe, 1991); incorporation of AIDS prevention education into the education of persons with developmental disabilities (Jacobs, Sarnowitz, Levy, & Levy, 1991); and work toward changing community attitudes toward individuals with disabilities (Muccigrosso, 1991). Core Concepts of Sexr_r_a_l Abuse Prevendon Edpcition Cdnicula This section outlines the core concepts of child sexual abuse prevention curricula as summarized by the Michigan Model for Comprehensive School Health Education for a- VI' _ u ’7’, o ‘- . u ,I c . Q I e . . \ n . A. I I n . .‘lr. Kai, § I let 44 Grades K-8 (Michigan Department of Education, 1992). It provides the core sexual abuse prevention concepts that are to be covered in school prevention programs within the state. These nine core concepts will be outlined below. 1. Touch distinctions. Children learn to differentiate between good, bad, and confusing touches. 2. Rules about touching. Children are taught they have the right to say ”no” to touches they do not want, even to adults. 3. Body boundaries. Children learn which parts of their bodies are private. 4. Different types of abuse. Children learn to differentiate between behaviors that are abusive and those that are not abusive. They are taught that (a) no one has the right to take pictures of you without your clothes on, (b) no one has the right to touch your private parts, (e) no one has the right to ask you to touch their private parts, ((1) no one has the right to ask to look at your private parts, and (e) no one has the right to ask you to look at their private parts. In addition, children learn that it is not right for someone to trick or. bribe them into doing something they do not want to do. 5. Different types of abusers. Children learn that abusers can have a variety of characteristics: (a) they can be strangers or people that they know, (b) they can be any age, and (c) they can be males or females. 6. Permissible situations for others to touch or look at them without clothes. They learn to differentiate between abusive behaviors, loving and caring touches, and medically necessary touches. Exceptions to rules about looking at and touching private parts of their bodies are taught: (a) it is permissible for a medical person to look at or touch private parts of your body for the ptu'pose of a medical exam, (b) it is permissible for a parent or caretaker to help you bathe if you cannot do it yourself, and (c) it is permissible for a parent or caretaker to put medicine on your private parts if you are sick or injured. 7. Avoidance skills. Children learn four steps to protect themselves from potentially abusive situations: (a) say "no,” refuse to participate; (b) leave the situation if you are able; iii-7.1.7363 rent: It" iipfitih tarpt;r at Chi titib; i558 II it terrier Necenciu amps t ifififlth! Citiditn u 325.3Ug item; iiitrarr thpg‘ dliifi'lgpm Tl lmflfmm 45 (c) tell a trusted adult about what happened; and (d) if the adult does not believe you, tell another trusted adult, and continue to do so until someone believes you. 8. Secrecy. Children learn that no one has the right to ask them to keep a secret about abusive situations. 9. Blame. Children learn that no matter what happens, it is not their fault. Conclusions Finkelhor et al. (1993) findings suggest that school-based prevention programs can increase children's sexual abuse prevention knowledge and help children avoid abuse when confronted with real potentially abusive situations. Although these programs have the potential to be effective, most programs do not successfully help children acquire the important nine core sexual abuse prevention concepts outlined in this section. Some concepts are easily learned by most children, and others are more difficult for children to learn. Children have difficulty grasping the concepts (a) that abuse can come from known adults, (b) that they should not keep secrets regarding abusive behaviors, and (c) that the abuse was not their fault. Individual characteristics were found to affect acquisition of these prevention concepts. Older children learned these concepts better than younger children. No conclusions were drawn regarding the effects of gender on acquisition of prevention concepts because the results varied and more research regarding this factor is needed. Research in the area of prevention education for individuals with disabilities suggested that children with disabilities may not learn prevention concepts as well as their nondisabled peers. Suggestions for improving sexual abuse prevention programs include (a) reinforce prevention concepts throughout the years to help children retain and integrate this information, (b) improve methodology used to evaluate if children have acquired these concepts, and (c) utilize cognitive and developmental theories to help design developmentally appropriate curricul um and instructional methods. The literature reviewed in this section had a direct impact on the design and implementation of this study. The Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment 46 Strategy was designed to help evaluate children's acquired knowledge of abuse prevention concepts. This strategy assesses acquisition of the core prevention concepts related to recognition and avoidance of potential abuse through the use of vignettes representing realistic potentially abusive situations. Utilization of this assessment strategy can help identify the concepts that children have not acquired, and provide insight to help design cuniculum and teaching method to meet these children's instructional needs. 47 CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a strategy to elicit and describe children's knowledge relating to recognition and avoidance of potential sexually abusive situations. The effects of children's sex, grade level, and educational status on acquisition of these competencies were examined. In addition, the effects that various characteristics of potentially abusive situations had on acquisition of this knowledge were studied. In order to accomplish this research goal, the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy (KSAPAS) was developed to elicit and describe children's prevention knowledge. This strategy involved reading eight vignettes representing both potentially abusive and non-abusive situations to children while showing them an illustration that depicted each scenario. After children were read each vignette, they were asked a set of five open-ended questions designed to elicit their perception of potential abuse level in the scenario and their perception of what they should do in the situation. Particiflts Subjects ranged in age from 8- 13 years and were in grades 3-7. This age group was selected because such children have the expressive language and memory of past experiences necessary for this type of study. In addition, most children within this age group have been exposed to school-based sexual abuse prevention education. Subjects from the special education group were limited to children with mild to moderate cognitive impairments. Children with more severe cognitive deficits may not have the expressive language and memory of past events necessary to elicit knowledge in this area. A total of 104 subjects were included in this study. Table 1 summarizes the number of subjects by grade, sex, and educational status. Subjects were limited to those who returned consent forms; therefore, groups by grade, sex, and educational status were not completely balanced as intended. The first eight subjects in the sample were used to field 48 test the strategy utilized to elicit children's knowledge prior to collecting data Since there were no changes made in the methodology after field testing, the data collected from the eight field testing subjects were included in the total sample. One seventh grade, male, special education student was unable to complete the strategy implemented; therefore, his partial data was left out of the data analysis. Subsequently, the data analysis was completed on a total of 103 subjects. Table 1 Number of Subiects by Age. Sex and Echrcatjonal Status Special Education Students Regular Education Students Grade Male Female Male Female n 3rd grade 3 5 5 5 18 4th grade 5 6 4 4 19 5th grade 2 3 7 5 17 6th grade 7 4 8 8 27 7th grade 3 3 8 8 22 =20 n=21 n=32 n=30 n: 103 49 Development oghe Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy 05%) This section will describe the stages of development for the strategy implemented to elicit children's knowledge to recognize and avoid potential abuse. Vignette Development First, a comprehensive literature review, including a review of various abuse prevention curricula for regular and special education populations, was conducted. The recommended core concepts that children should acquire from child sexual abuse prevention education were outlined (see Appendix A). Using this framework as a conceptual guide, nine vignettes were written; five represented different types of potentially abusive situations and four represented non-exploitative situations. These vignettes were constructed to be representative of the following factors relating to the core prevention concepts (a) the various forms of child sexual abuse, (b) the variations in gender mix of perpetrators and victims, (c) common sites of potential abuse, ((1) various levels of familiarity of perpetrator to victim, and (e) various types of coercive tactics employed. The nine vignettes and a description of the situational characteristics and content are presented below. Vigpettes Remesenting Potentially Abusive Situations #1 Uncle Taking Pictures. Description of Perpetrator. Known Adult Male, Relative Gender of Victim: Female Child Site: Victim's Home Inferred Method of Abuse: Taking Pictures of Victim when Unclothed Coercive Tactic: Trickery, Lying Mary's parents were going out to dinner, so they asked Uncle Joe if he could watch Mary until they got home. Uncle Joe came to Mary's house and her parents went to 50 dinner. She sat with Uncle Joe and watched TV. When a commercial came on about a camera, Uncle Joe said he had a camera in his pocket and wanted to see if it worked. Uncle Joe asked Mary if he could take some pictures of her. He said that her bright clothes would not look good in the picture, so he asked her to take off her clothes for the picture. fl Neighbor Bribing with Cookies. Description of Perpetrator. Known Adult Female, Neighbor Gender of Victim: Male Child Site: In Neighbor's Home Inferred Method of Abuse: Perpetrator Exposing Self to Victim Coercive Tactic: Food Reward Jose was walking home from school. When he was walking past his neighbor's house, Ms. Jones, she asked him to come inside her house. She told Jose that she just baked some chocolate chip cookies and wanted to give him some. Chocolate chip cookies were Jose's favorite so he decided to go inside to get some. When he went into her kitchen, Ms. Jones said that she hurt her arm and needed help getting dressed for work. She said that after Jose came up to her bedroom to help her change clothes, he could have some cookies. #3 Stranger in Van. Description of Perpetrator: Unknown Adult Female Gender of Victim: Female Child Site: Stranger's Motor Vehicle Inferred Method of Abuse: Not Specifically Inferred in Vignette Coercive Tactic: Creating Fear, Lying Latisha was walking home from school. A woman that she had never seen before pulled up next to her in her van. She told her that her mother was very sick. She 51 said that her mother asked her to pick Latisha up and drive her to the hospital so she could be with her sick mother. #4 Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in Bateroom. Description of Perpetrator. Unknown Adult Male Gender of Victim: Male Child Site: Public Men's Restroom Inferred Method of Abuse: Perpetrator Touching Victim Coercive Tactic: Trickery, Lying Troy was shopping in the mall with his mother. He uses a wheelchair to move around because his legs don't work He knows how to go to the bathroom by himself in the mall bathroom. He told his mother he was going to the bathroom and she waited outside the men's room door for him. When he got into the bathroom he noticed a man in there. The man told him that he would help him in the bathroom. The man said that he had a little boy in a wheelchair and knows that he needs help sometime when he goes to the bathroom. Vigettes Representing Non-Abgsive Situations #5 Teacher Praising Student. Description of Adult: Known Adult Female, Teacher Child Gender: Female Child Site: Classroom Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None Patty was in her math class. Mrs. Smith was very proud of her class because they all did their best on their math tests. When she gave the children their tests back, she put her hand on their shoulder and told them that she was very proud of them. 52 #6 Doctor Examining Injug. Description of Adult: Known Adult Male, Doctor Child Gender. Male Child Site: Doctor's Office Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None Mike fell off the swing at the playground and hurt his hip. His mother took him to their doctor. When Mike and his mother went into the doctor's office, the doctor told Mike to take his pants off and lie on the examining table so he could look at his injured hip. #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures. Description of Adult: Unknown Adult Male, School Photographer Child Gender. Male Child Site: School Gym Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None It was school picture day at Bobby's school. One at a time the students in his class went to the gym to have their pictures taken. When Bobby got to the gym, the photographer, Mr. Brook, asked Bobby to take his coat off for the picture, because it was covering the nice suit he was wearing. #8 Man Holding Door an at the Mall. Description of Adult: Unknown Adult Male Child Gender“. Female Child Site: Shopping Mall Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None 53 Tasha and her friends were going shopping at the mall. When they got to the door of the mall, a man they did not know held the door open for them and said ”good afternoon.” Additional Vignette Representi_ngLPotentially Abusive Situation with Peers #9 Girl Invited to Partry by Peers. Description of Perpetrators: Known Male Peers Gender of Victim: Female Child Site: Outdoor Park Inferred Method of Abuse: Not Specifically Inferred in Vignette Coercive Tactic: Trickery, Offering Reward Lena was walking her dog at the town park. She saw some boys in her class coming towards her. These boys did not treat Lena very nice in school. They never asked her to play with them or they never talked with her. They only called her mean names. She liked one of the boys, Jeff. The boys came up to Lena and told her that they were having a party at Jeff‘s house and wanted her to follow them to the party and join them. They told her if she went with them to the party, she could have a date with Jeff. Validation of Vignette Development Each of the nine vignette scenarios was reviewed by a panel of four judges consisting of two special education and two regular education teachers of students grades 3-7. These judges evaluated each vignette on the following dimensions: (a) understandability, (b) obviousness of potential harm represented in the scenario, (c) degree of perceived potential harm represented in the scenario, and (d) realistic nature of situation described in vignette. An Expert Judge Rating Form was developed to record this information for each vignette (see Appendix B). All of the nine vignettes were judged by all reviewers as understandable for subjects in grades 3-7. Vignettes #1, #2, #3, #4, and # 9 were judged by all reviewers as representing potentially abusive situations, and vignettes 54 #5, #6, #7, and #8 were judged by all reviewers as representing non-abusive situations. All nine vignettes were rated as representing realistic situations. No significant modifications were made in the vignettes as a result of this vignette review. The first eight vignettes represented situations involving children and adults. The last vignette, #9, represented a situation involving a child and her peers. This study focused on child sexual abuse, and vignette #9 represents a situation of potential sexual assault. Since this vignette represented a different type of abuse, it was not analyzed as part of this study. The data collected associated with this vignette may be analyzed at a later time to provide information regarding knowledge of potential harm involving peers. Development of Vignette Illustration_s Illustrations were developed to accompany each vignette scenario to assist children with comprehension and recall of the scenario details. The artist was instructed to included only information specifically stated in the vignettes. For example, the faces of the characters in the vignettes were drawn in a way to avoid implying specific emotions being expressed by each character. The illustrations for the KSAPAS are in Appendix C. Development of Interview Protocol A set of five open-ended questions was developed to elicit subjects' acquired knowledge to identify correctly potentially abusive situations and develop strategies to avoid potential abuse. After each vignette was read aloud, subjects were asked the following questions verbatim. Question #1: What happened in the story I just read to you? Question #2: What do you think will happen next in this story? Question #3: Why do you think that will happen next? Question #4: What do you think (n_ame of victim from vignette) should do in this situation? Question #5: What would you do in this situation? 55 Question #1: What happened in the story I just read to you? This was asked to determine whether subjects heard what was read to them, and whether they were able to repeat the important information stated in the vignettes. Question #2: What do you think will happen next in the story? and Question #3: Why do you think that will happen next? These questions were asked to elicit subjects' knowledge of potential abuse or lack of potential abuse in various situations and their ability to recognize it correctly. Question #4: What do you think (name of victim from vigpette) should do in this situation? and Question #5: What would you do in this situation? These questions were asked to elicit subjects' knowledge of effective strategies intended to avoid potentially abusive situations and their ability to use them appropriately. Both questions #4 and #5 were asked in the field testing phase with the intention of using only the one question which best elicited the intended information. Some subjects in the field testing sample were better able to answer the question when it was asked about the characters in the vignette, and other subjects were better able to answer the question when they projected themselves into the situation. Therefore, both questions were maintained as part of the final interview protocol since they both were important in eliciting the intended information. Development of Student Biogr_aphical Questionnaires The Student Biographical Questionnaire Completed by Teacher was developed to collect data regarding student characteristics of sex, age, grade, educational status, and special education classification (see Appendix D). The Student Biographical Questionnaire Completed by Researcher was designed to obtain student information regarding past education in abuse prevention (see Appendix E). A copy of the school health cuniculum, which included curriculum on child sexual abuse prevention, was used to provide information regarding the subject's past education in child sexual abuse prevention. 56 Procedures Subject Recruitment Subjects were recruited through the Ingham County Intermediate School District in Michigan. The Ingham County lnterrnediate School District (ISD) Special Services Research Committee reviewed this study. After obtaining approval from this committee, the proposed study was submitted to individual school districts for review from their district Research Review Committees. Once the project was approved by the district committee, individual schools were invited to participate. After obtaining approval from the principal in a specific school, classroom teachers were then recruited. Those classroom teachers who consented to participate sent consent forms home to parents to get permission for student participation. Subjects were selected randomly from a pool of volunteers in which consent was obtained, only when the pool of volunteers exceeded the intended sample size. A Parent Consent Form (see Appendix F) and a Teacher Consent Form (see Appendix G) were utilized to obtain inf ormed consent. After signed informed consent was obtained from parents, assent was obtained from students. The classroom teacher of the child obtained assent from the child to participate in the study. The teacher was asked to obtain assent for the following reasons: (a) the child knew the teacher and may have felt more comfortable declining to participate, (b) the teacher may have been viewed as less biased than the researcher in the recruitment of subjects, and (c) the teacher would be more familiar with the child's ability to comprehend information necessary for assent and could modify the assent procedures according to the cognitive ability of the child. The student was told the following information to obtain assent: purpose of study, f orrnat of study, confidentiality and anonymity procedures, time required for interview, place where interview would be conducted, and who would conduct the interview. The following statement was read to the students. 57 The investigator of the study wants to find out what you think another child should do in certain situations which will be presented to you. You will be read eight short stories and shown a picture of the story. You will be asked eight questions after each story. The answers to the questions will be recorded on a tape recorder. This is not a test and there are no right or wrong answers. The researcher just wants to see how different children answer the questions. No one except the researcher will know the answers you give to the questions. The only time someone will need to know the answers you give, is if you state that you have been hurt in a way that other adults will need to know so they can help you. It will take about 2080 minutes (non-academic time) to complete the interview. The interview will take place in the guidance counselor's office or psychologist/social worker's office in the school. A graduate student from MSU will be interviewing you. You can choose to do the study or choose not to do the study. It is OK. either way. If you choose to participate, you can choose to not answer certain questions or you can stop the interviewing at any time. Participation was voluntary and subjects were inf ormcd that they could withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. The researcher discussed this study with principals, teachers and parent groups prior to obtaining their agreement to participate in this study. Parents, guardians, and subjects were informed that information would be kept confidential with an exception. This exception was the ethical and legal responsibility to report suspicion of child abuse and/or neglect. If a child reported possible abuse or neglect during the interview, the researcher would follow the existing procedures set up by the school to deal with this situation. The researcher made sure that the procedures for dealing with this issue were clearly defined within each school. Prior to collecting any data, the researcher met with appropriate school personnel to go through these» procedures. A hypothetical case was presented and the researcher went through the school's procedures. Any clarifications regarding these procedures was addressed prior to meeting with 58 students. In addition, the researcher was aware of any subject expressing signs of distress during the study. These subjects would have had the opportunity to meet with the school psychologist/social worker. None of the subjects expressed observable signs of distress as a result of the study. Participants in this study were told that a summary of the study results would be made available upon request. A summary of the results would be sent to the participating school for review by any interested participant. This study received approval from the Human Subjects Committee of Michigan State University and followed all APA ethical guidelines. The psychological risk of this study was believed to be no greater than the risk involved in the educational process for child abuse prevention existing within the school system. When children are taught curricula concerning ways to protect themselves from potential abuse, there is the chance that a child has already experienced abuse. The information taught to the child in the area of abuse prevention may bring up memories of past abuse, which may or may not have been reported. This study was not intended to elicit information about past abuse, but if a child reported present abuse, procedures were identified to help the child and prevent continuing abuse. In addition, vignettes and interview questions were written in a sensitive manner to avoid any graphic descriptions of abusive situations. The term sexual abuse was not used with the subject Sexual abuse could only have been inferred by the child from their previous knowledge and education in this area. The subjects were not given any educational information regarding abuse within this study. Students received this information from their school curriculum. Data Collgtjon Proced_u§s_ The proposed strategy to elicit and describe children's acquired knowledge relating to recognition and avoidance of potential abuse was field tested on eight subjects who were representative of the upper and lower age limits of the data collection sample. There were it Sigi‘liia simpler L‘ St MCht.’ rmuor hangar. it 8'3me is: oi in e W The said be a mid sub. fudge (LC P After concl Witt b; It. [hi Silbjeg lit Mm {Littler mm R51300585 / 59 no significant modifications as a result of the field testing because all subjects were able to complete the required tasks as presented. Data collection proceeded as follows. Subject interviews took approximately 15-25 minutes for each subject. The researcher met with subjects at their schools in a counselor's office, during a non- instructional part of the school day, so subjects did not miss classwork during their participation in the study. The researcher read each vignette to the subject while showing the subject the illustration that depicted the story. The researcher then asked the subject the list of five open-ended questions. The responses were written down verbatim and audio- taped. The vignettes were presented in an alternating order to the subjects so learning effect could be examined. For example, the first subject was presented vignette #1 first, the second subject was presented vignette #2 first, etc. Each vignette that was rated by expert judges as potentially abusive was followed by a vignette that was rated as non-abusive. After concluding the interview, subjects were asked if they had any questions and then escorted back to their classroom. The Student Biographical Questionnaire to be Completed by Teacher was given to the subject's teacher to complete after the interview was done. These forms were collected the following week. The inf onnation for The Student Biographical Questionnaire to be Completed by Researcher was gathered by the researcher with the assistance of school personnel. After these biographical questionnaires and the interview were completed, the subject was assigned a number and any identifying information was removed from the data. Any identifying information obtained in the child's responses to the interview questions was removed or changed to protect the anonymity of the subject during data analysis. The complete responses to each of the five open-ended interview questions were transcribed from audiotapes and recorded verbatim on the Recording Sheet for Interview Responses (we Appendix H) for each vignette. 60 Data Analysis Following the data collection, a coding system was developed to categorize the subjects' interview responses. Next, a scoring system was developed to quantify the data for statistical analysis. Development of Codflg System to Analyze Open-Ended Interview Responses First, a system to code the f ive open-ended responses was developed. This coding system was developed after consulting with an expert in qualitative research and texts regarding the use of qualitative data (Goetz & IeCompte, 1984; Miles & Huberrnan, 1984; Taylor & Bogdan, 1984). The main purpose of this coding system was to help determine if the subject had accurate or inaccurate knowledge in two major areas of sexual abuse prevention education (a) recognition of potential abuse, and (b) development of avoidance strategies to avoid potential abuse. A special coding system was developed for each vignette to analyze the responses to question #1, what happened in the story I just read to you? The purpose of this question was to make sure the subject had heard the vignette and could recall the important information in the vignette accurately. A list was constructed for each vignette, listing the important facts in each scenario. An Interview Response Summary Sheet lists the important facts, specific to each vignette (see Appendix I, section 1). Some of the important facts included (a) gender of the characters in the story, (b) relationship of the adult to the child, (c) a description of the general situation, and (d) coercive tactics employed. Accurate information found in the response was checked off the list of important information. Inaccurate or missing inf orrnation was recorded on the Interview Response Summary Sheet verbatim. Only one of the 104 subjects was unable to recall the important information in the vignette. Therefore, this subject was removed from the sample and further analysis was completed on the remaining 103 subjects. This subject was classified as Trainable Mentally Impaired and did not appear to have the cognitive ability to complete the interview. Ne question # v.3 happt' recognize 1 m mnab: titer: (Ill. recognize ; abuse ii iii. are 135 a l tense In adult to ask tlollat ti lllditllt‘tl ll ‘3 ll It 35 5;. team m Witter Wetter W qui 61 Next, a coding system was developed to categorize the open-ended responses to question #2, what do you think will happen next?, and question #3, why do you think that will happen next? The purpose of these questions was to elicit subjects' knowledge to recognize potential abuse in potentially abusive situations, and recognize absence of abuse in non-abusive situations. Based on the core concepts of sexual abuse prevention education, criteria were set for each vignette which represented accurate knowledge to recognize potential abuse in the potentially abusive situations and recognize absence of abuse in the non-abusive situations. The Interview Response Summary Sheet, section 2, provides a list of the criteria for each vignette (see Appendix 1, section 2). An accurate response for the vignettes representing potential abuse indicted that it was wrong for the adult to ask the child to participate in the requested behavior, or it was not safe for the child to follow the adult's request. An accurate response for vignettes representing no abuse indicated it was acceptable for the adult to ask the child to engage in the requested behavior, or it was safe for the child to follow the adult's request If either of these criteria were present in the response, the response was accurate. Any inaccurate or missing inf ormation was recorded verbatim on the Interview Response Summary Sheet. Next, a coding system was developed to categorize the open-ended responses to question #4, what do you think (nime of child f rom Lignette) should do in this situation?, and question #5, what would you do in this situation? The purpose of these questions was to elicit subjects' knowledge to develop strategies to avoid potential harm. Criteria for an accurate response and inaccurate response was based on the four avoidance steps delineated in the core concepts of sexual abuse prevention education. The Interview Response Summary Sheet, section 3, provides a list of these criteria for each vignette (see Appendix I, section 3). Responses to the vignettes representing potential abuses were evaluated to determine which of the four avoidance steps were indicated. Responses to the vignettes representing no abuse were evaluated to determine if the child indicated there was no need Etna lli‘O are L, 4. .‘| Mel Qua. \ MANN near its; N Etntf 75km ( We Isl 62 to avoid the situation. Any inaccurate or missing information was recorded verbatim on the Interview Response Summary Sheet. After interview responses were categorized into the two main categories of accurate and inaccurate responses by the method described above, they were further subcategorized into various types of accurate and inaccurate responses. These subcategories were created by reading through all the responses and noting themes or patterns of responses. A classification system was developed to incorporate these themes. Similar themes were collapsed and new ones were added to incorporate all responses. See Appendix J, Categorization of Responses, for a presentation of the categorization of responses for vignettes representing potential abuse and vignettes representing no abuse. After the categories were developed and the data were classified into the subcategories, the coding system was evaluated for interrater agreement. Two independent raters with knowledge in the subject area were also asked to code the data according to the system developed. Raters were given the data separate from the coding categories. They were asked to match the data to the main categories. If the data did not f it into one of the given categories, the raters were asked to create a new one. For the purpose of this study, inter-rater agreement was only necessary for the main categories. The sub-categories would be collapsed for statistical analysis; therefore, inter-rater agreement was not calculated for sub-categories at this time. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by counting the number responses that agreed with the original coder for the 103 responses. The percentage of agreement was calculated by dividing the number in agreement into the total number of responses and divided into 100. Table 2 presents the percentage of agreement for the two vignettes used to determine inter-rater agreement. A high rate of agreement was found between the two raters indicating a highly reliable coding system. Tahiti o.~ 1 " ".. 4.! Derl.e.r#n' , , Ramse- \Hmetttt i lififl'tt‘ \igrele Table 2 Percent_age of Inter-Rater Agreement for Subject Response Coding Rater #1 Rater #2 Responses Classified n= 103 n=103 Vignette #1 (Q 2&3) 97.09% 96. 15% Vignette #1 (Q 4&5) 85.47% 85.47% Vignette #5 (Q 2&3) 99.03% 99.03% Vignette #5 (Q4&5) 94. 18% 94. 18% Scoringéystem for Vajiables Certain variables required the development of scoring systems in order to perform the quantitative statistical analyses necessary to test the proposed hypotheses. Merit Vap’ables Subject sex was scored as male =1 and female =2. Subject grade level was scored as grade 3 =1, grade 4 =2, grade 5 =3, grade 6 =4, and grade 7 =5. Educational status was scored as special education = 1 and regular education =2. This scoring system is summarized in Table 3. 1M 0] it} it files? What: Table 3 Summary of ScoringSystem for Independent Variables Independent Variables Levels Gender 1- male 2— female Grade 1- 3rd grade 2- 4th grade 3- 5th grade 4- 6th grade 5- 7th grade Educational Status 1- special education 2- regular education Degndent Variables Knowledge to Recogpjze Potential Abuse in Potenti_ally Abus_ive Situations. (Recognize Abuse-Abusive score) Each subject was presented with eight vignettes, four of which were rated as potentially abusive. After subjects were read these vignettes, they were asked what they thought would happen next in the story and why. The open- ended responses to these questions were coded into two categories. The first category included responses in which the subject failed to recognize harm in potentially abusive situations or the subject was not sure how to respond. This category of responses received a score of 0. The second category included responses in which the subject correctly identified potential harm in the situation. This category of responses received a score of 1. The Recognize Abuse-Abusive score is the sum of scores for all four vignettes representing potential abuses. Possible Recognize Abuse-Abusive scores range from O to 4, as follows: 65 O: The subject was not able to correctly recognize potential abuse in any of the four vignettes representing potential abuses. 1: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse in one of the four vignettes representing potential abuses. 2: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse in two of the four vignettes representing potential abuses. 3: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse in three of the four vignettes representing potential abuses. 4: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse in all four vignettes representing potential abuses. Knowledge to Recognize Absence of Abuse in Non-Abusive Situam (Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive score) Each subject was presented with eight vignettes, four of which were rated as non-abusive. After subjects were read these vignettes, they were asked what they thought would happen next in the story and why. The open-ended responses to these questions were coded into two categories. The first category included responses in which the subject identified harm in the non-abusive situation or was not sure how to respond. This category of responses received a score of 0. The second category included responses in which the subject did not identify harm in the non-abusive situation. This category of responses received a score of l. The Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive score is the sum of scores for all four vignettes representing no abuse. Possible Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores ranged from 0-4, as follows: 0: The subject was not able to correctly recognize absence of abuse in any of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 1: The subject was able to correctly recognize absence of abuse in one of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 66 2: The subject was able to correctly recognize absence of abuse in two of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 3: The subject was able to correctly recognize absence of abuse in three of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 4: The subject was able to correctly recognize absence of abuse in all four vignettes representing no abuse. Knowledge to Recpgnize Potential Abuse or Absence of Abuse in Situations where the Aertis Known to Lb; Child. (Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #1 and #2), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes # 5 and #6), involved adults that were known to the children in the stories. The Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score is the sum of the subject's Recognize Abuse-Abusive scores and Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores for these four vignettes with known adults. Possible Recognize Abuse-Known Adult scores range from 0 to 4, as follows: 0: The subject was not able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in any of the four vignettes with known adults. 1: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in one of the four vignettes with known adults. 2: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in two of the four vignettes with known adults. 3: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in three of the four vignettes with known adults. 4: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in all four vignettes with known adults. 67 Knowledge to Regime PoteLuagl Abuse or Absence of Abuse in Situationp where _tl;e_Ad_ult is Unknown to the Child; (Recognize Abuse—Unknown Adult score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #3 and #4), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes # 7 and #8), involved adults that were unknown to the child in the story. The Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score is the sum of the subject's Recognize Abuse- Abusive scores and Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores for these four vignettes with unknown adults. Possible Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult scores range from O to 4, as follows: 0: The subject was not able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in any of the four vignettes with unknown adults. 1: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in one of the four vignettes with unknown adults. 2: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in two of the four vignettes with unknown adults. 3: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in three of the four vignettes with unknown adults. 4: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in all four vignettes with unknown adults. Knowledge to Recogize Potential Abuse or Absence of Abuse in Situations where the Child is a Male. (Recognize Abuse-Boy score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #2 and #4), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes #6 and #7), involved male children. The Recognize Abuse-Boy score is the sum of the subject's Recognize Abuse-Abusive scores and Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-A busive scores for these four vignettes with male children. Possible Recognize Abuse-Boy scores range from O to 4, as follows: 68 0: The subject was not able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in any of the four vignettes with male children. 1: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in one of the four vignettes with male children. 2: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in two of the four vignettes with male children. 3: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in three of the four vignettes with male children. 4: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in all four vignettes with male children. Knowledge to Recognize Potential Abuse or Absence of Abuse in Situations where the Child is a Female. (Recognize Abuse-Girl score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #1 and #3), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes #5 and #8), involved female children. The Recognize Abuse-Girl score is the sum of the subject's Recognize Abuse-Abusive scores and Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores for these four vignettes with female children. Possible Recognize Abuse-Girl scores range from 0 to 4, as follows: 0: The subject was not able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in any of the four vignettes with female children. 1: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in one of the four vignettes with female children. 2: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in two of the four vignettes with female children. 3: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in three of the four vignettes with female children. tit. AU oil I 69 4: The subject was able to correctly recognize potential abuse and absence of abuse in all four vignettes with female children. Knowledgefito Avoid Potential Abuse in Potentially Abusive Situagrns. (Avoid Abuse-Abusive score) Each subject was presented with eight vignettes, four of which were rated as potentially abusive. After subjects were read these vignettes, they were asked what they thought the child should do in that situation, and what they would have done in that situation. The open-ended responses to these questions were coded into five categories. These categories were based on the four steps to avoid potentially abusive situations delineated by Sexual Abuse Prevention Education Curriculum (a) say no, (b) leave the situation and go to a safe place, (c) tell an adult you trust, and ((1) keep telling a trusted adult until someone believes you. 0: None of the four steps were indicated. 1: One of the four steps were indicated. 2: Two of the four steps were indicted. 3: Three of the four steps were indicated. 4: All four steps were indicated. The Avoid Abuse-Abusive score is the sum of these scores for the four vignettes representing potential abuses. Possible scores range from 0 to 16. The highest possible score of 16 would indicate the subject was able to state all four steps for all four vignettes representing potential abuses. The lowest possible score of 0 would indicate the subject was not able to state at least one avoidance step for at least one vignette representing potential abuse. Knowledge of No Need to Avoid Non-Awive Situm (Not Avoid-Non-Abusive score) Each subject was presented with eight vignettes, four of which were rated as non-abusive. After subjects were read these vignettes, they were asked what they thought the child should do in that situation, and what they would have done in that situation. The open-ended responses to these questions were coded into PJ— 70 two categories. The first category included responses which indicated the need to avoid the non-abusive situation, and received a score of 0. The second category included responses which indicated there was no need to avoid the non-abusive situation, and received a score of 4. The Not Avoid-Non-Abuse score is the sum of these scores for the four vignettes representing no abuse. Possible scores are 0, 4, 8, 12, and 16. 0: The subject was not able to recognize there was no need to avoid abuse in all four vignettes representing no abuse. 4: The subject was able to recognize there was no need to avoid abuse in one of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 8: The subject was able to recognize there was no need to avoid abuse in two of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 12: The subject was able to recognize there was no need to avoid abuse in three of the four vignettes representing no abuse. 16: The subject was able to recognize there was no need to avoid abuse in all four vignettes representing no abuse. Knowledge to Avoid Potential Abuse or Not Avoid Non-Abpse in Situations where the Adph is Known to the Child; (Avoid Abuse-Known Adult score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #1 and #2), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes # 5 and #6), involved adults that were known to the children in the stories. The Avoid Abuse- Known Adult score is the sum of the subject's Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores and Not Avoid-Non-Abuse scores for these four vignettes with known adults. Possible Avoid Abuse-Known Adult scores range from O to 16. The highest possible score of 16 would indicate the subject was able to state all four avoidance steps for potential abusive vignettes and indicate no need to avoid vignettes representing no abuse for the four vignettes with known adults. The lowest possible score of 0 would indicate the subject was unable to state 71 at least one avoidance step for at least one vignette representing potential abuse, and was unable to indicate there was no need to avoid at least one vignette representing no abuse. Knowledge to Avoid Potentidl Abuse or Not Avoid Non-Abuse in Situations where the [Lint is Unknown to the Child. (Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #3 and #4), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes # 7 and #8), involved adults that were unknown to the children in the stories. The Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score is the sum of the subject's Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores and Not Avoid-Non-Abuse scores for these four vignettes with unknown adults. Possible Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult scores range from 0 to 16. The highest possible score of 16 would indicate the subject was able to state all four avoidance steps for potential abusive vignettes and indicate no need to avoid vignettes representing no abuse for the four vignettes with unknown adults. The lowest possible score of 0 would indicate the subject was unable to state at least one avoidance step for at least one vignette representing potential abuse, and was unable to indicate there was no need to avoid at least one vignette representing no abuse. Knowledge to Avoid Potential Abuse or Not Avoid Non-Abuse in Situations where the Child is Male. (Avoid Abuse-Boy score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #2 and #4), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes #6 and #7) involved male children. The Avoid Abuse-Boy score is the sum of the subject's Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores and Not Avoid-Non-Abuse scores for these four vignettes with male children. Possible Avoid Abuse-Boy scores range from 0 to 16. The highest possible score of 16 would indicate the subject was able to state all four avoidance steps for potential abusive vignettes and indicate no need to avoid vignettes representing no abuse for the four vignettes with male children. The lowest possible score of 0 would indicate the subject was unable to state at least one avoidance step for at least one vignette representing potential 72 abuse, and was unable to indicate there was no need to avoid at least one vignette representing no abuse. Knowledge to Avoid Poten_tia_i Abuse or Not Avoid Non-Abuse in Situations where the Child is Female. (Avoid Abuse-Girl score) Two of the vignettes representing potential abuses (vignettes #1 and #3), and two of the vignettes representing no abuse (vignettes #5 and #8) involved female children. The Avoid Abuse-Girl score is the sum of the subject's Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores and Not Avoid-Non-Abuse scores for these four vignettes with female children. Possible Avoid Abuse-Girl scores range from 0 to 16. The highest possible score of 16 would indicate the subject was able to state all four avoidance steps for potential abusive vignettes and indicate no need to avoid vignettes representing no abuse for the four vignettes with female children. The lowest possible score of 0 would indicate the subject was unable to state at least one avoidance step for at least one vignette representing potential abuse, and was unable to indicate there was no need to avoid at least one vignette representing no abuse. 73 The scoring system with potential score ranges for the dependent variables is summarized in Table 4. Table 4 Stunmary of Scoring System for Dependent Variables Dependent Variables Range of Scores Vignette Numbers Involved in Score Recognize Abuse-Abusive score 0-4 1,2,3 ,4 Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive 0-4 5,6,7,8 score Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score 0-4 1,2,5,6 Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score 0-4 3 ,4,7,8 Recognize Abuse-Boy score 0-4 2,4,6,7 Recognize Abuse-Girl score 0-4 1,3,5,8 Avoid Abuse-Abusive score 016 1,2,3,4 Not Avoid-Non—Abusive score 0, 4, 8, 12, 16 5,6,7,8 Avoid Abuse-Known Adult score 0-16 1,2,5,6 Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score 0— 16 3 ,4,7,8 Avoid Abuse-Boy score 016 2,4,6,7 Avoid Abuse-Girl score 0- 16 1,3,5,8 74 Data Anplm The following statistical analyses were used in this study to test the proposed hypotheses. One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to calculate the difference between the means of two knowledge-based competency scores, when there was only one dependent variable. Multiple Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was used to examine the main and interaction effects between the means, when there were two or more dependent variables. Tukey's test of pairwise comparisons was selected for the post hoc analysis to determine which pairs of means were significantly different. This test was selected because it was the most powerful test statistic when analysis is limited to pairwise comparisons. 75 CHAPTER IV RESULTS This section presents the statistical results from the data analyses. Inferences and interpretations regarding these results are presented in the discussion section. The results are presented in three main sections. The first section presents the ~ statistical analyses related to knowledge-based competencies to recognize potential abuse. The second section presents the statistical analyses related to knowledge-based competencies to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse. The effects of specific subject characteristics and specific vignette characteristics on subjects' competencies are explored in each section. The last section will provide a summary of the hypotheses. Knowledge-Based Competencies Relating to Recognition of Potential Abuse This section examines how well subjects are able to recognize potential abuse. It is divided into four areas of analysis (a) a description of competencies by individual vignettes, (b) the effects of subjects' characteristics on competencies, (c) the effects of specific vignette characteristics on competencies, and (d) the interaction effects of subject characteristics with specific vignette characteristics on competencies. Recognition Comgtencies by Individual Vigpettes In this section, the same data regarding recognition responses are presented in three different ways. First, the data are displayed to present the number of responses in each of the three major response categories. Next, two of these major response categories are collapsed to f orm the scoring categories for these responses. In the last section, the mean recognition scores for each vignette are presented and compared to determine if there are any significant differences in the way subjects responded to the eight vignettes. 76 Subject R_esponses Cla_ssified_py Major Response Catgpries Subject responses to the eight vignettes were examined. This section presents the number of subject responses classified in each of the major response categories for each vignette. These are displayed separately for the four vignettes representing potentially abusive situations and the four vignettes representing non-abusive situations. Vigr_rettes representing potent_ial abuse. Three major response categories were used to classify subject responses relating to recognition of potential abuse. The first category included the subject responses that recognized potential abuse within the vignette scenario. The second category included subject responses that did not recognize potential abuse within the vignette scenario. The last category included responses that indicated the subject was unsure of a response. A total of 103 subject responses were analyzed. Table 5 lists the number of subject responses and percentage of subject responses within these three major response categories. Table 5 Number and Percentage of Subject Rama in M_ajor Response Categories for Recogpition of Potential Abt_t_se by Vignettes Represent_ir_rg Potential Abug Major Response Categories Did Not Title of Vignette Recognized Recognize Not Sure of Representing Potential Abuse Potential Abuse Response Potential Abuse p (%) p (%) n_(%) #1 Uncle Taking Pictures 75 (73) 20 (19) 8 (8) #2 Neighbor Bribing with 67 (65) 22 (21) 14 (14) Cookies #3 Stranger in Van 91 (88) 7 (7) 5(5) #4 Stranger Attempting to 82 (80) 12 (12) 9 (9) Assist Boy in Bathroom Note. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding Vigpettes representing no abuse. The same major response categories were used to classify subject responses related to recognition of potential abuse for the vignettes representing no abuse. Table 6 lists the number of subject responses and percentage of subject responses within the three major response categories. Table 6 Mberand Percentage of Subject Resmnses in Major Resmnse Categories for Recognition of Potenaal Aba_se by Vignettes Representing No Abuse Major Response Categories Did Not Title of Vignette Recognized Recognize Not Sure of Representing Potential Abuse Potential Abuse Response No Abuse p (%) p (%) p (%) #5 Teacher Praising Student 13 ( 13) 76 (74) 14 ( l4) #6 Doctor Examining Injury 20 (19) 74 (72) 9 (9) #7 School Photographer 25 (24) 66 (64) 13 (13) Taking Pictures #8 Man Holding Door Open 18 (17) 8O (78) 5 (5) at Mall l_\l_;_et_c;. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding Spbiect Responses by Scoring Categories This section presents the number of correct and incorrect subject responses for recognition of potential abuse for each vignette. Correct recognition of potential abuse depended on the type of vignette presented. For example, recognition of potential abuse for a vignette representing potential abuse was considered a correct response and received a score of 1, where as, recognition of potential abuse for a vignette representing no abuse was considered an incorrect response and received a score of 0. When a subject was unable to provide a response it was considered incorrect and received a score of 0. 78 Vignettes rapresentflgmtm'al abuse. Table 7 presents the number and percentage of correct and incorrect responses for each of the four vignettes representing potential abuse. The percentage of subject responses that correctly recognized potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing potential abuse ranged from 65%-88%. The percentage of subject responses that failed to recognize potential abuse when presented with vignettes representing potential abuse ranged from 12%-35%. Table 7 Number and Percentage of Correcm: Incorrect Subject Responses for Recognition of Potergial Abuse by Vignettes Representing Potendal Abuse Score=1 800er Title of Vignette Correctly Recognized Failed to Recognize Representing Potential Potential Abuse Potential Abuse Abuse 2 (%) a (%) #1 Uncle Taking Pictures 75 (73) 28 (27) #2 Neighbor Bribing with 67 (65) 36 (35) Cookies #3 Stranger in Van 91 (88) 12 (12) #4 Stranger Attempting to 82 (80) 21 (20) Assist Boy in Bathroom Vignettesgpresenting no abuse. Table 8 presents the number and percentage of correct and incorrect responses for each of the four vignettes representing no abuse. The percentage of subject responses that correctly recognized absence of abuse when presented with vignettes representing no abuse ranged from 64%-78%. The percentage of subject responses that incorrectly recognized absence of abuse when presented with vignettes representing no abuse ranged from 22%- 36%. 79 Table 8 Number and Percentage of Correct and Incorrect Subject Responses for Recogni tion of Absence of Abu_se by Vignettes Representing No Abuse Score=1 Score=0 Title of Vignette Correctly Recognized Failed to Recognize Representing Absence of Abuse Absence of Abuse No Abuse p (%) p (%) #5 Teacher Praising Student 76 (74) 27 (26) #6 Doctor Examining Injury 74 (72) 29 (28) #7 School Photographer 66 (64) 37 (36) Taking Pictures #8 Man Holding Door Open 80 (78) 23 (22) at Mall Comparison of RMon Competency Scores by Individual Vignettes This section compares the mean recognition of abuse scores for each of the vignettes representing potential abuse and with the mean recognition of abuse scores for each of the vignettes representing no abuse. A correct subject response for recognition of potential abuse received a score of 1, and an incorrect subject response for recognition of potential abuse received a score of 0. These scores for all subjects were totaled for each vignette and the mean score was calculated. The mean scores were compared by using an analysis of variance to determine if there were any significant differences between mean recognition scores for each vignette. Vignettes regesenting pptential abuse. Table 9 lists the means and standard deviations for the Recognize Abuse-Abusive scores for each vignette representing potential abuse. An ANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant differences among the Recognize Abuse—Abusive means of the four vignettes representing potential abuse (see Table 10). The results of this analysis indicated that there was a significant difference among the mean Recognize Abuse- 80 Abusive scores for the vignettes representing potential abuse, F(3,411)=7.25, p<.001. Tukey pairwise comparisons were calculated to determine which pairs of means differed significantly (see Table 11). The results of this analysis indicated that subjects were significantly better at recognizing abuse in vignette #3 Stranger in Van (M=.883) when compared with vignette #1 Uncle Taking Pictures (M=.728) and vignette #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (M=.65). Subjects were also significantly better at recognizing abuse for vignette #4 Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in Bathroom (M=.80) when compared with vignette #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (M=.65). There were no other significant differences found between mean pairs. Table 9 Means and Standard Deviations for Recognize Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes Mean RA-A Title of Vignette Representing Potential Abuse p Score Q #1 Uncle Taking Pictures 103 .73 .45 #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies 103 .65 .48 #3 Stranger in Van 103 .88 .32 #4 Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in Bathroom 103 .80 .40 Note. RA-A is an abbreviation for Recognize Abuse-Abusive ,.l.\\ t 51.». r . . . he. Ce... a ..v is: 4 ‘- tee. a i... W .. ‘ ‘ Iv . DP. plum. .. U x S An. ~ DI .Q T «\v x 0 nirll — «WWW El 1 81 Table 10 One Factor AN OVA-Repeated Meaaures for Mean Recognize Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vimttes Source di E P value Between subjects 102 l .88 .0001 * Within Subjects 309 vignettes 3 7.25 .0001* residuals 306 Total 41 1 *Significant at .001 level Table 11 Post Hoc Apaiysis: Tukey Pairwise Comparisrms of Mean Recognize Abuse-Abusive Scores by Mates Vignette Comparison Mean Difference Tukey Value #3 vs. #2 .23 6.47* #3 vs. #1 .15 4.30* #4 vs. #2 .15 4.05* #3 vs. #4 .09 .24 #1 vs. #2 .08 #4 vs. #1 .07 Note. *Significant at .05 level; 4 q 306 at .05=3.69 82 Vignettes remesentingmo abuse. A similar analysis was done for the mean Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non- Abusive scores. The results indicated that there were no significant differences among the means for these scores (see Table 12 and Table 13). From a statistical perspective, subjects were able to recognize absence of abuse about the same for all four vignettes representing no abuse. Table 12 Mean Recognge Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes Mean RAA-NA Title of Vignette Representing No Abuse p Score SQ # 5 Teacher Praising Student 103 .74 .44 # 6 Doctor Examining Injury 103 .72 .45 #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures 103 .64 .48 #8 Man Holding Door Open at Mall 103 .78 .42 Note: RAA-NA is an abbreviation for Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive Table 13 One Factor AN OVA-Repeated Measures for Mean Recognize Absence of Abuse—Non- Abusive Scores by Vignettes Source d_f E P value Between subjects 102 2.9 1 .0001 * Within Subjects 309 vignettes 3 2.48 .06 residuals 306 Total 41 1 *Significant at .001 level _E_f[ec_ts of Stibject Chggcteristics on Recrgnition Competency Scores This section will examine the effects of subjects' sex, grade, and educational status on competency to recognize potential abuse. The dependent variable being measured is the sum of recognition scores for the eight vignettes. These scores were calculated by summing the Recognize Abuse-Abusive scores and Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores for each subject. An examination of the interaction effects of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics on recognition competencies will follow. An ANOVA was performed to analyze the effects of these subject characteristics on competency to recognize potential abuse (see Table 14). There was one significant main effect for grade, F(4,83)=2.67, p<.05. This indicated children's general competency to recognize potential abuse was dependent on their grade level. A post hoc analysis was performed to determine which grade levels scored significantly different. Table 15 lists the means and standard deviations for each grade level. Table 16 presents the results of the Tukey pairwise mean comparisons. The results of this post hoc analysis indicated that 5th 84 graders (M=6.71) were significantly better at recognizing potential abuse than both 3rd graders (M=5.11) and 4th graders (M=5.68). In addition, 7th graders (M=6.27) were significantly better at recognizing potential abuse than 3rd graders (M=5.11). No other significant differences between pairs of means. The result of this ANOVA also indicated that general competency to recognize potential abuse was not dependent on sex, or educational status of the children (see Table 14). Table 14 Between Stibject Effects of Subject Characteristics on Recognition Competency Scores Source d_f E P value Between Subjects Grade 4 2.67 0037* Sex 1 0.03 0.87 Grade x Sex 4 0.60 0.66 Ed Status 1 0.02 0.90 Grade x Ed Status 4 0.55 0.70 Sex x Ed Status 1 0.63 0.43 Grade x Sex x Ed 4 1.39 0.25 Status Error 83 * Significant at .05 level Table 15 Mean Sum Recognition Scores by Grade Sum Recognition Grade a Mean Scores Si; 3rd 18 5.1 1 2.1 1 4th 19 5.68 1.56 5th 17 6.71 1.16 6th 27 5.89 1.45 7th 22 6.27 1.52 Table 16 Post Hoc Anaiysis: Tigey Pairwise Comparisons of Sam Recognition Means by Grade Grade Comparison Mean Difference Tukey Value 5th vs. 3rd 1.59 6.62”“ 7th vs. 3rd 1.16 4.83”“ 5th vs. 4th 1.02 425* 5th vs. 6th .82 3.42 6th vs. 3rd .78 7th vs. 4th .59 4th vs. 3rd .57 5th vs. 7th .43 7th Vs 6th .38 6th vs. 4th .20 No_te. *Significant at .05 level; 5 q 83 at .05 = 3.98 _E_f_fec_ts of Specific Vignette Characteristics on Recogition Commtency Scores Three vignette characteristics were examined; abuse level, adult familiarity, and child gender. This section will explore the effects these vignette characteristics had on mean recognition competency scores. An examination of the interaction effects of vignette characteristics and subject characteristics on recognition competencies will follow. Abuse Level The first vignette characteristic examined was abuse level. There were two levels of abuse; potentially abusive and non-abusive. The Recognize Abuse-Abusive score is the 87 sum of recognition scores for the four vignettes representing potential abuse. These scores ranged from 0-4 (see Table 17). The Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive score is the sum of recognition scores for the four vignettes representing no abuse. These scores ranged from 0-4 (see Table 17). The mean sum scores were then calculated for the entire group of 103 subjects. These mean scores were compared within a MANOVA. The results indicated there were no significant differences between the mean Recognize Abuse-Abuse score (M=3.06) and the mean Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive score (M=2.87), F(1,83)=.63, p>.05 (see Table 18). Therefore, when examining all children together, their competencies did not differ significantly when presented with vignettes representing potential abuse and those representing no abuse. Adult Familiariy The second vignette characteristic examined was adult familiarity. There were two levels of adult familiarity, known adult and unknown adult. The Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score is the sum of recognition scores for the four vignettes representing known adults. These scores ranged from 0-4 (see Table 17). The Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score is the sum of recognition scores for the four vignettes representing unknown adults. These scores ranged from 0-4 (see Table 17). These scores were summed for the 103 subjects and the means were calculated. The mean Recognize Abuse-Known Adult scores was M=2.83, and the mean Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score was M=3. 10 (see Table 17). A MANOVA was performed and there was no significant difference found between these two means, F(1,83)=3.17, p>.05 (see Table 19). Therefore, when examining all children together, their competencies to recognize potential abuse did not differ significantly when they were presented with vignettes representing known adults and those representing unknown adults. Child Gender The third vignette characteristic examined was gender of the child. There were two levels of child gender, boy and girl. The Recognize Abuse-Boy score is the sum of the four 88 vignettes representing male children. These scores ranged from 0-4 (see Table 17). The Recognize Abuse-Girl score is the sum of the four vignettes representing female children. These scores range from 0-4 (see Table 17). These scores were summed for the 103 subjects and the means were calculated. The mean Recognize Abuse-Boy score was M=2.80, and the mean Recognize Abuse-Girl score was M=3. 13 (see Table 17). A MANOVA was performed and there was a significant difference found between these two means, F(1,83)=7. 17, p< .01 (see Table 21). This result indicated that when children were examined together, they were significantly better at recognizing potential abuse when female children were represented in vignettes as compared to when male children were represented in vignettes. 89 Table 17 Means and Standard Deviations for Knowledge-Based Competency Scores for Recogition of Potential Abuse by Vignette Characteristics Vignette Minimum Maximum Characteristic Recognition Score M Q Score Score Abuse Level Recognize Abuse- 3.06 1.05 0 4 Abusive Recognize Absence 2.87 1.26 0 4 of Abuse-Non- Abusive Adult Familiarity Recognize Abuse- 2.83 0.99 0 4 Known Recognize Abuse- 3. 10 0.96 0 4 Unknown Child Gender Recognize Abuse- 2.80 0.98 0 4 Boy Recognize Abuse- 3. 13 0.97 0 4 Giri Interaction Effects of Subject Characteristics wi g Vi gnette Chflterisiics on Recognition Competency Scores In the previous two sections, the effects of subject characteristics and the effects of vignette characteristics were examined separately. This section explores the interaction effects of subjects' grade, sex, and educational status with the vignette characteristics abuse level, adult familiarity, and child gender on recognition competency scores. Abuse Level The interaction effects of subject's sex, grade, and educational status with the vignette characteristic of abuse level was examined. A MANOVA was performed to 90 determine if there were any significant effects for these factors (see Table 18). Results indicated that there was no significant interaction pattern of subjects' sex, grade, or educational status with the vignette characteristic of abuse level for recognition competencies. Table 18 lists the F values for each interaction tested. Table 18 Interaction Effects of Subject_§' Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with gnette Characterisiic of Abuse Level on Recognition Competency Scores Source di E P value Within Subjects Vi gpette Characteristic Abuse Level 1 0.63 0.43 (Abuse vs. No Abuse) Subject Characteristics x V' griette Characteristic Abuse Level x 4 1.60 0.18 Grade Abuse Level x 1 2.83 0.09 Sex Abuse Level x 4 0.84 0.50 Grade x Sex Abuse Level x 1 0.00 0.95 Ed Status Abuse Level x 4 0.85 0.49 Grade x Ed Status Abuse Level x 1 0.67 0.41 Sex x Ed Status Abuse Level x 4 0.20 0.94 Grade x Sex x Ed Status Error 83 ‘ r9. Rim :1" IE‘CC 91 Adult Familiarig The interaction effects of subjects' sex, grade, and educational status with the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity was examined. A MANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant effects among these factors (see Table 19). Results found that there was one significant interaction pattern for subjects' educational status with the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity in their recognition competency, F(1,83)=8.78, p<.01 (see Table 19). This result indicated that regular education students were better at recognizing potential abuse for unknown adults when compared to known adults. This pattern was not present for the special education group. This latter group was able to recognize abuse about the same for known and unknown adults. Table 20 lists the means and standard deviations for these scores. There were no other significant interaction patterns for subject characteristics and the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity on recognition competencies. Table 19 Interaction Effects of grbject Sex, Grade, and Edugadond Status wit_h Vignette Characterisgic of Adult Familiarity on Recognition Competency Scores Source d_f E P value Within Subjects Vi gpette Characteristic Adult Familiarity (Known vs. Unknown) Subiect Characteristics x V' gpette Characteristic Adult Familiarity x Grade Adult Familiarity x Sex Adult Familiarity x Grade x Sex Adult Familiarity x Ed Status Adult Familiarity x Grade x Ed Status Adult Familiarity x Sex x Ed Status Adult Familiarity x Grade x Sex x Ed Status Error 3.17 1.34 0.17 2.14 8.78 1.62 0.31 1.26 0.08 0.26 0.68 0.08 0.004* 0.18 0.58 0.29 *Significant at .01 level ‘1': 1'2’.’ 1:? rec HIE 93 Table 20 Mean Recognize Abuse-Known Adult Scores and Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult Scores by Educational Status Recognition of Recognition of Abuse-Known Adult Abuse-Unknown Adult Mean Score Mean Score Educau'onal Status M( SD) M( SD) Regular Education 2.77 (1.06) 3.24 (0.86) Special Education 2.92 (0.88) 2.88 ( 1.08) Child Gender The interaction effects of subjects' sex, grade, and educational status with vignette of child gender was examined. A MANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant effects for these factors (see Table 21). Results indicated one significant interaction pattern for subject educational status by sex with vignette characteristic of child gender, F(1,83)=15.12, p<.01 (see Table 21). This means that the nature of interaction between subjects' educational status and sex depended on the gender of child represented in the vignette. Male regular education students were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls were represented in the vignettes, and male special education students were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for vignettes representing girls and vignettes representing boys. This pattern was reversed for female subjects. Female regular education subjects were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for vignettes representing girls and vignettes representing boys, and female special education students were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls were represented in the vignettes. Table 22 lists the means and standard deviations for these scores. - «\o - .rH1 .15 _ r. 1H» «.\c _ .l t _ C G C .Vw Table 21 Interaction Effects of Subject Sex, Gradegand Educational Status witii Vigpette Characteristic of Child Gender on Recognition Comgtency Scores Source di' E P value Within Subjects lignette Char_acteristi_c Child Gender (Boy vs. Girl) Subject Characteristics x Vi flue Characteristic Child Gender x Grade Child Gender x Sex Child Gender x Grade x Sex Child Gender x Ed Status Child Gender x Grade x Ed Status Child Gender x Sex x Ed Status Child Gender x Grade x Sex x Ed Status Error 7.17 1.04 0.03 0.90 0.03 1.46 15.12 0.46 0009* 0.39 0.87 0.46 0.86 0.22 0.0002* 0.76 *Significant at .01 level '39. 95 Table 22 Mean Recognize Abuse-Boy Scores and Recognize Abuse-Girl Scores by Subject Sex and Educational Status Recognition of Recognition of Abuse-Boy Score Abuse-Girl Score Subject Characteristics M( SD) M(SD) Regular Education Male 2.78 (1.16) 3.44 (0.84) Female 2.93 (0.78) 2.87 (1.01) Special Education Male 2.90 (1.07) 2.80 (1.15) Female 2.57 (0.87) 3.33 (0.73) Knowledge-Based Competencies to Develop Strategies to Avoid Potential Abuse This section will examine how well subjects are able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse. It is divided into four areas of analysis (a) a description of competencies by individual vignettes; (b) the effects of subjects' characteristics on competencies; (c) the effects of specific vignette characteristics on competencies; and (d) the interaction effects of subject characteristics with specific vignette characteristics on competencies. Avoidance Cormietencies by Individual Vigpettes In this section, the same data regarding avoidance responses will be presented in three different ways. First, the data will be displayed to present the number of responses in each of the three major response categories. Next, responses will be presented in the response scoring categories. In the last section, the mean avoidance scores for each vignette will be calculated and compared to determine if there were any significant differences in the ways subjects responded to the eight vignettes. (ll) 1 11‘ 3‘» 31 Oil 96 Subject Respongses Classified by Major Response Categories As described earlier the eight vignettes were grouped according to the four vignettes representing potentially abusive situations and the four vignettes representing non-abusive situations. This section presents the number of subject responses classified into each of the major response categories for each vignette. Vignettes represenarig potential abuse. There were ten major response categories used to classify subject responses relating to avoidance of potential abuse. These response categories were based on the four step avoidance strategy taught within sexual abuse prevention curriculum, (a) refuse to participate, (b) leave the situation and go to a safe place, (c) tell a trusted adult about what happened, and (d) keep telling trusted adults until someone believes you. The first response category included responses that stated the first step. The second response category included responses that stated the first two steps. The third response category included responses that stated the first three steps. The fourth response category included responses that stated all four steps. The remaining five response categories included various combinations of the four steps and a sixth category included responses that indicated the subject was unsure of a response. See Table 23 for a list of the ten major response categories. There were a total of 103 subject responses. Table 23 lists the number and percentage of subject responses classified within each of these ten response categories for each of the vignettes representing potential abuse. Table 23 Number and Percentage of Subject Respon_ses in Major Resp_onse Categories for Avoidance of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing Potential Abuse Title Of refuse, Vignette go, tell, need Representing refuse, refuse, keep refuse, follow more Potential rd'use go go, tell telling tell go, tell go adult not sure inf. Abuse g(%) g(%) u(%) 94%) g(%) g(%) n_(%) g(%) g(%) g(%) #1 Uncle 55 1 1 21 0 13 1 0 1 l 0 Taking (53) (ll) (20) (0) (13) ( 1) (0) (l) ( 1) (0) Pictures #2 Neighbor 24 26 11 0 1 16 16 5 1 3 Bl'ibiQSWith (23) (25) (11) (0) (1) (15) (15) (5) (1) (3) Cookies #3 Stranger 13 13 16 1 O 20 29 0 0 11 in Van (13) (13) ( 15) (1) (0) (19) (28) (0) (0) (11) #4 Stranger 68 7 12 0 2 6 7 0 0 1 Attemptingio (66) (7) (12) (0) (2) (6) (8) (0) (0) (l) Assrst Boy in Bathroom N;ete. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding fignettes representing no abuse. The same major response categories were used to classify subject responses relating to avoidance of potential abuse for the vignettes representing no abuse. Table 24 lists the number and percentage of subject responses within each of the ten major response categories for each vignette representing no abuse. Table 24 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in Major Response Categories for Avoidance of Potential Abuse by Vignettes Representing No Abuse refuse, Title of go, tell, Vignette refuse, 1311188 keep refuse, follow Representing rd’use go go, tell telling tell go, tell go adult not sure No Abuse g(%) u(%) g(%) g(%) g(%) g(%) g(%) 21%) g(%) [[1018 g (%) #5 Teacher 14 0 2 0 1 2 3 76 5 Praising (14%) (0%) (2%) (0%) ( 1%) (2%) (3%) (74%) (5%) Student #6Doctor 18 2 o o o o o 69 7 Examining (17%) (2%) (0%) (0%) (0%) (0%) 0% (67%) (7%) Injury #7 School 50 1 0 0 O 2 0 44 3 Photographer (48%) ( 1%) (0%) (0%) (0%) (2%) (0%) (43%) (3%) Taking ' Pictures #8 Man 9 0 0 0 0 6 3 78 1 Holding (9%) (0%) (0%) (0%) (0%) (6%) (3%) (76%) ( 1%) Door Open at Mall (0%) (7%) (3%) (6%) N_ote_;. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding Subject Responses Classified by Scoring System This section presents the number of subject responses within each of the avoidance scoring categories. The scoring system depended on the type of vignette as described in the following section. An avoidance score for a vignette representing potential abuse ranged from 0-4, and an avoidance score for a vignette representing no abuse was either 0 (incorrect) or 4 (correct). Vignettes represegtipgpotentfl abuse. The Avoid Abuse—Abusive score for each vignette representing potential abuse ranged from 0-4. A score of 0 indicated the subject's response failed to include any of the 99 four avoidance steps. Scores of 1-4 indicated the number of avoidance steps included in the subject's response. A score of 1 indicated that any one of the four avoidance steps were included in the response. A score of 2 indicated that any two of the four avoidance steps were included in the response. A score of 3 indicated that any three of the four avoidance steps were included in the response. A score of 4 indicated that all four of the avoidance steps were included in the response. Table 25 lists the number and percentage of subject responses in each of the scoring categories for each vignette representing potential abuse. Table 25 N_umber a_nd Percentage of Subject Responses in each of the Response Scoring Categories for Avoidance Scores bngignettes Represenapg Potential Abuse Score=0 Score=l Score=2 Score=3 Score=4 Title of Abusive Vignettes p (%) p (%) p (%) r_r_(%) n_(%) #1 Uncle Taking Pictures 2 (2%) 55 (53%) 25 (24%) 21 (20%) 0 (0%) #2 Neighbor Bribing with 9 (9%) 40 (39%) 43 (42%) 11 (11%) 0 (0%) Cookies #3 Stranger in Van 11 (11%) 42 (41%) 33 (32%) 17 (16%) O (0%) #4 Stranger Attempting to 1 (1%) 75 (73%) 15 (15%) 12 (12%) 0 (0%) Assist Boy in Bathroom flora. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding Vigpettes representing no abuse. The Not Avoid-Non-Abusive score was either 0 or 4 for each vignette representing no abuse. A score of 0 indicated the subject's response included steps to avoid potential abuse when there was no need to avoid the non-abusive situation. Therefore, if any avoidance steps were included in the response, it was considered incorrect and received a score of 0. A score of 4 indicated the subject correctly realized there was no need to take steps to avoid the non-abusive situation. Table 26 lists the number and percentage of subject responses in each of the scoring categories for each vignette representing no abuse. 100 Table 26 Number and Percentage of Subject Responses in each of the Response ScoririgCateJLories for Avoidance Score by Vignettes RepresentingNo Abuse Score=4 Score=0 Indicated No Indicated Need Need to Avoid to Avoid Non-Abusive Non-Abusive Situations Situations Title of Vignette Representing No Abuse p (%) p (%) #5 Teacher Praising Student 76 (74%) 27 (26%) #6 Doctor Examining Injury 69 (67%) 34 (33 %) #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures 44 (43 %) 59 (57%) #8 Man Holding Door Open at Mall 78 (76%) 25 (24%) Comw‘ son of Avoidgnce Competency Scores by Individual Vignettes This section presents a comparison of the mean avoidance scores for each of the vignettes representing abuse and each of the vignettes representing no abuse. Vigpettes regesenting potential abuse. Table 27 lists the mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores for each vignette representing potential abuse for all 103 subjects. An ANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant differences between mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores for the four vignettes (see Table 28). Results indicated there were no significant differences between the mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores for the four vignettes representing potentially abusive situations, F(3,41 l)=2.29, p>.05. Subjects competencies to develop avoidance strategies were not dependent on the specific vignette presented. 101 Table 27 Mean and Standard Deviations for Avoid Abuse-Abusive Scores by Vignettes Mean AA-A Title of Vignette Representing Potential Abuse p Score _S_D #1 Uncle Taking Pictures 103 1.63 .83 #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies 103 1.54 .80 #3 Stranger in Van 103 1.54 .89 #4 Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in 103 1.37 .7 Bathroom Table 28 One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measures for Mea_n Avoid Abuse-A busive Scores by Vigppttes Source d_f E P value Between subjects 102 1.80 .0001* Within Subjects 309 vignettes 3 2.29 .08 residuals 306 Total 41 1 *Significant at .001 level ”h 102 Vigaettes representing no abuse. Table 29 lists the mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive scores for each vignette representing no abuse for all 103 subjects. An ANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant differences between mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive scores for the four vignettes (see Table 30). Results indicated there were significant differences between the mean Not Avoid-Non-Abuse scores for the four vignettes representing non-abusive situations. A post hoc analysis was performed to determine which pairs of means differed significantly (see Table 31). The results of the Tukey pairwise mean comparisons indicated that subjects could not recognize there was no need to develop avoidance strategies for vignette #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures (M: 1.71) as well as they could for vignette #5 Teacher Praising Student (M=2.95), vignette #6 Doctor Examining Injury (M=2.68), and vignette #8 Man Holding Door Open at Mall (M=3.03). No significant differences were found between the other pairs of means. Table 29 Mean and Standard Deviadon for Not Avoid-Non-Abusive Scores by Vignettes Mean NA-NA Title of Vignette Representing No Abuse p Score El; #5 Teacher Praising Student 103 2.95 1.77 #6me Examining Injury 103 2.68 1.89 #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures 103 1.71 1.98 #8 Man Holding Door Open at Mall 103 3.03 1.72 Iii C Table 30 103 One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measures for Mean Not Avoid-Non-A busive Scores by Vigettes Source d_f E P value Between subjects 102 1.62 .0009“ Within Subjects 309 vignettes 3 13.44 .0001* residuals 306 Total 41 1 ”“Significant at .001 level Table 3 1 Post Hoc Analysis: Tukey Pairwise Comgiisona of Mgan Not Avoid-Non-Abu_sive Scores by Vigpettes Vignette Comparisons Mean Differences Tukey Value #8 vs. #7 1.32 8.00”“ #5 vs. #7 1.24 7.53”“ #6 vs. #7 .97 4.06”“ #8 vs. #6 .35 2.12 #5 vs. #6 .27 #8 vs. #5 .08 Note. *Significant at .05 level; 4 q 306 at .05 = 3.69 104 fleets of Stigjectgaiacteriiics on Avoida_nce Competency Scores This section will examine the effects of subjects' sex, grade, and educational status on competency to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse. The dependent variable being measured is the total of avoidance scores for the eight vignettes. These scores were calculated by summing the Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores and Not Avoid-Non-Abusive scores for each subject. An examination of the interaction effects of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics on avoidance competencies will follow. An ANOVA was performed to analyze the effects of these subject characteristics on competency to avoid potential abuse (see Table 32). There were no significant effects found for these factors. General competencies to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse were not dependent on subject's sex, grade, or educational status. See Table 32 for a list of non- significant F values. Table 32 Between Sabject Effects of Subject Chagcteristics on Avoida_nce Competencies Source _d_f E P value Between Subjects Grade 4 0.09 0.99 Sex 1 1.40 0.24 Grade x Sex 4 1.32 0.27 Ed Status 1 0.18 0.67 Grade x Ed Status 4 1.54 0.20 Sex x Ed Status 1 0.01 0.91 Grade x Sex x Ed Status 4 0.93 0.45 Error 83 105 m of Specific Vignette Cfiracteristics on Avoidance Competencies Three vignette characteristics were analyzed, abuse level, adult familiarity, and child gender. This section will explore the main effect of these vignette characteristics on avoidance competency scores. An examination of the interaction effects of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics on avoidance competencies will follow. Abuse Level The first vignette characteristic was abuse level, potentially abusive versus non- abusive. The mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive (M=6.09, SD=1.99, Min=2, Max=11) and mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive (M=10.37, SD=4.52, Min=0, Max=16) scores were not compared because they involved different scoring systems and different distributions of scores. Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores were continuous and ranged from 04. Not Avoid- Non-Abusive scores were dichotomous, either 0 or 4. Adult Familiarity The second vignette characteristic was adult familiarity, known adult versus unknown adult. The Avoid Abuse-Known Adult score and the Avoid Abuse—Unknown Adult score were each calculated by summing avoidance scores from two vignettes representing potential abuse and two vignettes representing no abuse. These total scores included an equivalent number of vignettes from the two different scoring systems and they had similar continuous distributions; therefore they were compared statistically. The Avoid Abuse-Known Adult score is the sum of the avoidance scores for the four vignettes representing known adults. These scores range from 0-16. The Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score is the sum of the avoidance scores for the four vignettes representing unknown adults. These scores range from 0-16. The mean Avoid Abuse-Known Adult score (M=8.80) and mean Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score (M=7.65) were calculated for all 103 subjects (see Table 33). These two means were compared within a MANOVA statistical analysis (see Table 34). The results of this statistical analysis indicated that the mean Avoid Abuse-Known Adult score was significantly higher when compared with the mean able I unln Abus scare abuse Mean AVOII Straw Itpra 106 mean Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score, F( 1,83)=l4.38, p<.001. Subjects were better able to develop avoidance strategies for vignettes with known adults than for vignettes with unknown adults. Child Gender The third vignette characteristic was child gender, boy versus girl. The Avoid Abuse-Boy score and Avoid Abuse-Girl score were each calculated by summing avoidance scores from two vignettes representing potential abuse and two vignettes representing no abuse. These total scores included an equivalent number of vignettes from the two different scoring systems and produced similar continuous distributions; therefore, they were compared statistically. The Avoid Abuse-Boy score is the sum of the avoidance scores for the four vignettes representing male children. These scores ranged from 0-16. The Avoid Abuse-Girl score is the sum of the avoidance scores for the four vignettes representing female children. These scores ranged from 0-16. The mean Avoid Abuse-Boy score (M=7.30) and mean Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult score (M=9. 15) were calculated for all 103 subjects (see Table 33). These two means were compared within a MANOVA statistical analysis (see Table 37). The results of this statistical analysis indicated that the mean Avoid Abuse-Girl score was significantly higher when compared with the mean Avoid Abuse-Boy score, F(l,83)=23.21, p<.001. Subjects were better able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes representing female children than vignettes representing male children. 107 Table 33 Means and Standard Deviagion for Avoidance Competency Scores by \Qgriette Characteristics Vignette Minimum Maximum Characteristic Avoidance Score _lyi _SQ Score Score AdultFamiliarity Avoid Abuse- 8.80 2.88 2 14 Known Adult Avoid Abuse- 7.65 2.98 1 13 Unknown Adult Child Gender Avoid Abuse-Boy 7.30 3.23 1 13 Avoid Abuse-Girl 9. 15 2.83 2 14 Interaction Effects of Subject Chamtenspcs wit_h Vignette Characteristics on Avogance Competency Scores In the previous two sections, the effects of subject characteristics and the effects of vignette characteristics were examined separately. This section will explore the interaction effects of subjects' grade, sex, and educational status with the vignette characteristics adult f arniliarity and child gender on avoidance competency scores. Abuse Level Since the avoidance scores for vignettes representing potential abuse and vignettes representing no abuse involved different scoring systems and different distributions, they were not compared. Therefore, the interaction effects for subject characteristics and vignette characteristic of abuse level was not analyzed. AdultFamiliariiy The interaction effects of subjects' sex, grade, and educational status with vignette characteristic of adult familiarity was examined. A MANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant effects for these factors (see Table 34). Results indicated that :- [Ill 31 I: me.- 315 1(B there were two significant interaction effects. There was a significant interaction for subject sex with vignette characteristic of adult familiarity, F( 1,83)=4.22, p<.05. This indicated that although both male and female subjects were better at developing avoidance strategies for known adults, the male children were quantitatively better than females for known adults. There was a significant interaction for subject educational status with vignette characteristic of adult familiarity, F( 1,83)=8.4l, p<.01 (see Table 34). This indicated that regular education students competency to develop avoidance strategies were about the same for known and unknown adults, while special education students were better at developing avoidance strategies for known adults. Table 35 lists the means of Avoid Abuse-Known Adult scores and Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult scores by subjects' sex. Table 36 lists the means of Avoid Abuse-Known Adult scores and Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult scores by subjects' educational status. 109 Table 34 Interaction Effects of Sabiects' Sex, Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette gameteristic of Adult Familiaiiiy on Avoidance Competency Scores. Source d_f E P value Within Subjects Vi gpette Characteristic AdultFamiliarity 1 14.38 0.0003* (Known vs. Unknown) Subiect Characteristics x Vigiette Characteristic Adult Familiarity x 4 0. 18 0.95 Grade Adult Familiarity x 1 4.22 0.04”“ Sex Adult Familiarity x 4 0.60 0.66 Grade x Sex Adult Familiarity x 1 8.41 0005”“ Ed Status Adult Familiarity x 4 0.75 0.56 Grade x Ed Status Adult Familiarity x l 0.79 0.38 Sex x Ed Status Adult Familiarity x 4 2.27 0.07 Grade x Sex x Ed Status Error 83 *Significant at .05 level Table 35 110 Mean Avoid Abuse—Known Adult Scores and Mean Avoid Abuse-Unknown Adult Scores by Subject Characteristic of Sex Avoid Abuse- Avoid Abuse- Known Adult Unknown Adult Score Score Subjects' Sex M( SD) M( SD) Male 9.27 (2.72) 7.65 (3.22) Female 8.33 (3.0) 7.64 (2.75) Table 36 Mean Avoid Abuse-Known Adult Scores and Mean Avoid Abuse-ngnown Adult Scores by Subject Chgracteri stic of Educational Status Avoid Abuse- Avoid Abuse- Known Adult Unknown Adult Subjects' Score Score Educational Status M( SD) M} SD) Regular Education 8.48 (2.98) 8.06 (2.83) Special Education 9.29 (2.69) 7.02 (3.13) Child Gender The interaction effects of subjects' sex, grade, and educational status with vignette characteristic of child gender were examined. A MANOVA was performed to determine if there were any significant effects for these factors (see Table 37). Results indicated that there were no significant interaction patterns for these factors. See Table 3 for a list of the F values. 111 Table 37 Interaction Effect_s of Sabjects' Sex. Grade, and Educational Status with Vignette Characteristic of Child Gender on Avoida_nce Competency Scores Source d_f: E P value Within Subjects Vi mac Characteristic Child Gender 1 23 .21 0.0001 ”“ (Boy vs. Girl ) Subject Chflcteristics x V' gigtte Characteristic Child Gender x 4 1.74 0.15 Grade Child Gender x 1 2.47 0.12 Sex Child Gender x 4 0.48 0.75 Grade x Sex Child Gender x 1 0.20 0.65 Ed Status Child Gender x 4 1.01 0.41 Grade x Ed Status Child Gender x 1 3.32 0.07 Sex x Ed Status Child Gender x 4 0.77 0.55 Grade x Sex x Ed Status Error 83 “Significant at .05 level 112 Summary of Hypotheses and Results The initial hypotheses will be restated with results summarized. This is to provide a brief synopsis of findings in relation to the original hypotheses offered. 111190115868 Regar__di_ng Knowledge-Based Comgetencies to Recognize Potendai Abuse Descripp'on of Recogpition Competencies byVignettes Hypothesis 1: Children's knowledge to recognize potential abuse will vary. Their knowledge to recognize potential abuse will depend on the situations represented in the vignettes. This hypothesis was supported by the results. The mean Recognize Abuse-Abusive score for each vignette was less than 1.0. This indicated that not all children were able to recognize potential abuse in each vignette. An examination of children's Recognize Abuse- Abusive scores found that their competency to recognize potential abuse varied with the specific potentially abusive vignette presented. This score could be either 1 or 0 for each vignette. Children were significantly better at recognizing abuse in vignette # 3 Stranger in Van (88% of responses correct), when compared with vignette #1 Uncle Taking Pictures (73% of responses correct) and vignette #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (65% of responses correct). Subjects were also significantly better at recognizing abuse in vignette #4 Stranger Assisting Boy in the Bathroom (80% of responses correct), when compared to vignette #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (65% of responses correct). All of the mean Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores for each vignette were less that 1.0, indicating that not all children could recognize the absence of abuse in each of the four vignettes representing no abuse. This score can have a value of 0 or 1 for each vignette. An examination of children's knowledge to recognize the absence of abuse found that children did not differ significantly in their ability to recognize absence of abuse in the four vignettes representing no abuse. 113 Effects of Specific Vignette Characteristics on Recggnflon Competencies Hypothesis 2: Children will be able to recognize potential abuse for vignettes with unknown adults better than with known adults. This hypothesis was not statistically supported by the results. Children's competency to recognize potential abuse for situations involving known adults did not differ significantly from their competency to recognize potential abuse for situations involving unknown adults. The mean Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score (M=2.83) was not significantly different from the mean Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score (M=3. 10). The range of this score is 0—4 for the set of four vignettes. Hypothesis 3: Children will be able to recognize potential abuse for vignettes with female children better than with male children. This hypothesis was supported by the results. Children were significantly better able to recognize potential abuse when presented with situations that involved female children, than when presented with situations that involved male children. The mean Recognize Abuse-Girl score (M=3.13) was significantly higher than the Recognize Abuse- Boy score (M=2.80). This score ranged from 0-4 for the set of four vignettes. Effects of Sflific Subiect Claracteristics on Recognition Compatencies Hypothesis 4: There will be no effect of subject sex on knowledge to recognize potential abuse. This hypothesis was supported by the results. There was no significant difference between male (M=6.0) and female subjects'(M=5.8) regarding their total Recognize Abuse score. The Recognize Abuse score equals the sum of Recognize Abuse-Abusive score and Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive score. The range for this score is 0—8. Hypothesis 5: Children in higher grades will be able to recognize potential abuse better than children in lower grades. This hypothesis was supported by the results. The total Recognize Abuse score was dependent on the grade level of the subject. Specifically, 5th graders (M=6.7l) were 114 significantly better at recognizing potential abuse, than both 3rd graders (M=5.11) and 4th graders (M=5.68). The 7th graders (M=6.27) were significantly better than the 3rd graders (M=5.11). In general, when significant differences were found between grade levels, higher grades were better than lower grades at recognizing potential abuse. The 6th graders (M=5.89) did not differ significantly from any of the other grades. These scores ranged from 0-8. Hypothesis 6: Children in regular education will be able to recognize potential abuse better than children in special education. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. Special education (M=5.8) and regular education students (M=6.0) did not differ significantly regarding their ability to recognize potential abuse when presented with the eight vignettes. Scores ranged from 0-8. Hypothesis 7: There will be an interaction effect of subject sex, grade and educational status on knowledge to recognize potential abuse. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. An examination of the total competency score for all eight vignettes showed no interaction effects for subject sex, grade and educational status. Interaction Effects of Vigaette Characteristics with Subiect Chgacteristics on Recognition anpetencies The interaction of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics were analyzed although no hypotheses were formulated. Results indicated no significant interaction effect for vignette characteristic of abuse level with subject characteristics. A significant two-way interaction pattern was found for the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity with subject characteristic of educational status. Regular education students were better at recognizing potential abuse for unknown adults (M=3.24) than for known adults (M=2.‘T7). This pattern was not present for special education students. The special education group were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for known (M=2.92) and unknown adults (M=2.88). In addition, the recognition scores for known adults were about the same for lb '03 5031 1113 115 both regular education (M=2.77) and special education groups (M=2.92), whereas the recognition score for unknown adults was higher for the regular education group (M=3.24), than for the special education group (M=2.88). These scores ranged from 0-4 for the set of four vignettes. There was a significant three-way interaction between vignette characteristic of child gender and subject characteristics of sex and educational status. The interaction pattem between subjects' educational status and sex depended on the gender of the child in the vignette. Male regular education students were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls (M=3.44) rather than boys (M=2.78) were represented in vignettes, and male special education students were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for boy (M=2.90) vignettes and girl vignettes (M=2.80). This pattern reversed for female subjects. Female regular education students were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for boy (M=2.93)vignettes and girl (M=2.87)vignettes, and female special education students were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls (M=3.33) were represented in the vignettes rather than boys (M=2.57). These scores ranged from 0—4 for the set of four vignettes. Hymtheses Regarding Competencies to Avoid Potena'al Abasg Descripa'on of Avoida_nce Competencies by Vignettes Hypothesis 8: Children's knowledge regarding avoidance of potential abuse will vary. Their knowledge to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse will depend on the situations represented in the vignettes. This hypothesis was partially supported by the results. The mean Avoid Abuse- Abusive score for each vignette was less than 4.0, indicating that not all subjects were able to develop avoidance strategies that included all four steps. Scores ranged from 0-4 for each vignette. There was no significant difference among mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores for these four vignettes. The mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive score for each vignette representing no abuse was less than 4.0. This indicated that not all subjects were able to recognize that there was 116 no need to avoid these situations. There were significant differences for mean Not Avoid- Non-Abusive scores among the four vignettes. Specifically, subjects were significantly less able to recognize that they did not have to avoid the situation presented in vignette #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures (M=1.71, 43% of responses correct), then they were for vignette #5 Teacher Praising Student (M=2.95, 74% of responses correct), vignette #6 Doctor Examining Injury (M=2.68, 67% of responses correct), and vignette #8 Man Holding Door Open at the Mall (M=3.03, 76% of responses correct). Score values could be either 0 or 4 for each vignettes. fleas of Specific Vi gmtte Characteristics on Avoidance Competencies Hypothesis 9. Children will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes with unknown adults better than with known adults. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. The pattem of results was reversed. Children were able to develop avoidance strategies significantly better for situations involving known adults (M=8.80), than for situations with unknown adults (M=7.65). Scores ranged from 0-16. Hypothesis 10: Children will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes with female children better than with male children. This hypothesis was supported by the results. Children were able to develop avoidance strategies significantly better for situations involving female children (M=9.15), than for situations involving male children (M=7.30). Scores ranged from 0-16. Efgfects fipecific Subject Characteristics on Avoida_nce Competencies Hypothesis 11: There will be no effect of subject sex on knowledge to avoid potential abuse. This hypothesis was supported by the results. There was no significant difference between male and female subjects' competency to develop avoidance strategies. The mean total Avoid Abuse score for male subjects was (16.92) and the score for female subjects was (15.98). The total Avoid Abuse score was calculated by summing the Avoid Abuse- 117 Abusive scores and Not Avoid-Non-Abusive scores for each subject. Scores ranged from 0-32. Hypothesis 12: Children in higher grade levels will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse better than children in lower grades. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. Subjects grade level did not have a significant effect on competencies to develop avoidance strategies. The total Avoid Abuse mean scores for each grade level were 3rd grade (M=16.78), 4th grade (M=15.90), 5th grade (M=16.30), 6th grade (M=16.37), and 7th grade (M=16.9l). Scores ranged from 0- 32. Hypothesis 13: Children in regular education will be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse better than children in special education. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. Special education students (M=16.32) and regular education students (M=16.55) did not differ significantly regarding competencies to develop avoidance strategies. The range of scores for total Avoid Abuse score was 0-32. Hypothesis 14: There will be an interaction effect of subject sex, grade and educational status on knowledge to avoid potential abuse. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. There were no significant interactions of subject sex, grade, and educational status on competencies to develop avoidance strategies. Interaction Effects of Vignette Characterig'cs with Subject Characteristics on Avoida_n_c_e Competencies The interactions of subject characteristics with vignette characteristics were analyzed, although no hypotheses were f onnulated. There was a significant interaction for the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity with sex of subject. Results indicated that both male (M=9.27) and female (M=8.33) subjects were better at developing avoidance strategies for known adults, than for unknown adults (males, M=7.65) (females, M=7.64), 118 although the male (M=9.27) subjects were better than the female (M=8.33) subjects for the known adults. Scores ranged from 0-16. Another two-way interaction involved the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity with educational status of subject. The results indicated that regular education subjects avoidance competencies were about the same for known (M=8.48) and unknown adults (M=8.06), while the special education subjects were better at developing avoidance strategies for known adults (M=9.29) than for unknown adults (M=7.02). Scores ranged from 0-16. There were no significant interactions for subject characteristics with vignette characteristic of child gender. 119 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION This section begins with an outline of the study limitations to provide the reader with a framework to more accurately interpret the results. Next, the results are discussed in light of the existing literature and possible interpretations of key findings are offered. Implications for practice and for future research are presented. This section ends with conclusions drawn from this research. Limitations of Study The researcher encountered resistance from school personnel during the subject recruitment process. Many school personnel were concerned about becoming involved in research dealing with the topic of child sexual abuse. The most common reason given by school personnel for not participating was concern about parental reactions to this research. School personnel stated that some parents raised objections to child sexual abuse prevention instruction in their school. They believed that research in this area would only increase parental resistance to this type of instruction. Therefore, the researcher of this study had to meet with a large number of school groups and school personnel before finding an adequate number of schools from which to recruit the subjects. Subject recruitment procedures followed the ethical guidelines for obtainment of informed consent. Subject selection involved five levels of consent. First, it was required from a school district superintendent before individual school principals could be recruited. Next, a school principal had to give permission for teachers in that school to become involved in the study. Once a teacher formally agreed to participate, parental consent forms were sent home with all children in that teacher's classroom. Finally, assent was obtained from individual students who received consent from their parents to participate. This complex recruitment procedure may have produwd a biased sample of subjects for this study. School districts and individual school personnel that agreed to have their 120 students' knowledge of sexual abuse prevention studied, may have had more confidence in the quality of their prevention programs than those personnel that declined to participate. Another reason for sample bias could be that parents who provided informed consent may be more comfortable with the topic of sexual abuse, therefore, provide more education regarding this topic at home. In addition, children that gave informed assent to participate may have been more confident about their knowledge in this area than the children that did not agree to participate. As a result, the majority of subjects in this sample may have had more knowledge of abuse prevention than those that did not participate, and not accurately represent the subject groups of interest. Therefore, caution should be taken when interpreting between group differences for grade, sex, and educational status since the subjects in these groups may not be representative of these groups. Subject recruitment was limited to a suburban and a rural—suburban school district from the same county in a midwestem state. This sample was not representative of the population and caution should be taken when generalizing these results to groups other than those included in the sample. Unknown limitations in the validity and reliability of the instrument developed for this study may have contributed to error. No existing instrument to measure children's acquired knowledge of recognition and avoidance of potential abuse could be found in the literature. Therefore, this study relied on expert judges and assumptions from prior research to determine the construct validity of the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Suategy. The Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy was designed to be a useful and practical assessment tool in schools. Therefore, the time for administration of this strategy had to be kept to a minimum. As a result, the number of vignettes used to elicit children's knowledge was limited to eight vignettes that represented the core prevention concepts. These vignettes were written to include variations in factors such as 121 gender of the child and the adult, familiarity of the adult to the child, and type of coercive tactic employed by the potential perpetrator. In order to most effectively assess the effect of one of these vignette characteristics on prevention knowledge, the other characteristics should be held constant. In order to accomplish this a large number of vignettes would be needed and this would not be practical for administration in a school setting. Caution should be used when interpreting the results dealing with vignette characteristics. Differences in knowledge regarding vignette characteristics may not be solely attributed to the one factor under examination but could reflect the combination of factors in the vignette. The information obtained regarding a subject's previous instruction in sexual abuse prevention education was limited to a review of the school curriculum and a review of requirements for instruction. The school curriculum was reviewed to assure that all the core sexual abuse prevention concepts were included in the curriculum. Since this curriculum was required to be taught, it was assumed for the purpose of this study that all subjects had received this education. This method did not take into account that some children may have transferred from other schools, or missed this education for another reason, such as parental objection. Therefore, when interpreting results, it cannot be assumed that limited competencies were a result of poor acquisition. It may be because children were not exposed to the prevention information. When the interaction of two or three subject characteristics was under examination, there was a small number of subjects in each group. Smaller cell size increases the measurement error. Thus, this factor should be kept in mind when interpreting the interaction effects between subjects. 122 Discussion of Major Findings In this section, the hypotheses are restated and a brief summary of the results are presented. Following each hypothesis is a discussion of the results. First the results related to recognition competencies are discussed; next the results related to avoidance competencies are discussed. Findings Regarding Knowledgg-Based Competencies to Recoggize Potential Abuse Description of General Recogmion Competencies The first hypothesis held that children's knowledge to recognize potential abuse would vary and that their knowledge would depend on the characteristics of the situations represented in the vignettes. This hypothesis was supported by the results. The mean Recognize Abuse-Abusive score for each vignette was less than 1.0. This indicated that not all children were able to recognize potential abuse in each vignette. Children were significantly better at recognizing abuse in vignette # 3 Stranger in Van (88% of responses correct), when compared with vignette #1 Uncle Taking Pictures (73% of responses correct) and vignette #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (65% of responses correct). Subjects were also significantly better at recognizing abuse in vignette #4 Stranger Assisting Boy in the Bathroom (80% of responses correct), when compared to vignette #2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (65% of responses correct). Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) examined children's acquisition of prevention concepts. They concluded that some concepts were easily learned by most children, and other concepts were more difficult to learn. Children tended to have more difficulty with the concept that known adults could be abusers (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). An analysis of the results of this study indicated that a larger percentage of children were able to recognize potential abuse for the two vignettes involving unknown adults (#1 Stranger in Van=88% 123 of response correct, and #4 Stranger Assisting Boy in the Bathroom=80% responses correct), than for the two vignettes representing known adults (#2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies=65% of responses correct, and #1 Uncle Taking Picture=73% of responses correct). Children had most difficulty recognizing abuse in vignette # 2 Neighbor Bribing with Cookies. A review of the subjects' responses to this vignette found that most of the inaccurate responses indicated that the boy should help the lady undress because he wanted the cookies and they were his favorite type. These children did not identify the offer of cookies as a bribe. Therefore, these children may have difficulty recognizing potential abuse when this type of food reward is used as a coercive tactic. The second most common inaccurate response for vignette #2 was that the boy should help the neighbor because she was injured. Typically, children are taught to be friendly and helpful to their neighbors. Children with this type of inaccurate response did not identify the woman's injury as a way to trick the boy into helping her. Therefore, they may have difficulty recognizing potential abuse when the adult employs this type of coercion. ' In vignette #2 the potential perpetrator was a woman. The effect of adult gender was not analyzed along with the other three vignette characteristics because the vignettes were not balanced for this factor. There was not an equal number of vignettes representing male and female adults. Some children that correctly recognized potential abuse indicated that the act was wrong because the gender of the child and adult was opposite. It would be important to know if the child would have thought the act was safe if the gender of the child and the gender of the adult were the same. Children need to know that it is wrong for adults to ask children to help them undress, regardless of their gender. It is important to explore children's rationale for identifying potential abuse, because they could successfully identify the situation as potentially abusive, yet miss the 124 underlying concept of why the situation could be abusive. This would lead to problems in generalizing concepts of abuse prevention to other situations. Children were able to recognize potential abuse best for vignette #2 Stranger in Van. One explanation for this result was that a scenario similar to this one was used as an example in the parent consent form. Parents may have discussed this scenario with their children prior to the assessment. Krents et al. (1987) stated that parents need to reinforce prevention concepts at home to help children learn these concepts. Instruction from parents may have helped children recognize potential abuse in this situation. Another possible explanation why children were able to recognize potential abuse best for vignette #2 is that they learned to recognize this type of potential abuse in curricular areas other than abuse prevention. Hazzard et al. (1991) stated that prevention concepts need to be integrated and reinforced in other curricular areas to help children acquire this knowledge. Some children stated they learned it was not safe to accept rides from strangers at boy scouts, from parents, and during safety education. This type of scenario is usually taught within safety education and the other vignette scenarios, if taught, are usually reserved for abuse prevention instruction. Therefore, a broader spectrum of instruction may make children better able to recognize potentially abusive situations. Vignette # 1 Uncle Taking Pictures involved a male relative requesting a female child to remove her clothes for a picture. The most common inaccurate response to this vignette was that the child should follow the request because it was made by a relative. Children need to recognize that it would be dangerous to allow anyone to take pictures of them without their clothes on, even if they are relatives or other known people. Vignette #4 Stranger Assisting Boy in the Bathroom differed from the other vignettes because the child in the vignette was in a wheelchair. Most of the inaccurate responses for this vignette indicated that the child should accept help from the adult because the child was disabled and needed help. This was an interesting response because the scenario in the vignette specifically stated that the child was able to use the bathroom 12.5 unassisted. Children may have projected a common misconception, that individuals with disabilities need help and are unable to care for themselves, into their response. The mean Recognize Absence of Abuse-Non-Abusive scores for each vignette were less that 1.0, indicating that not all children could recognize the absence of abuse in each of the four vignettes representing no abuse. An examination of children's knowledge to recognize the absence of abuse found that children did not differ significantly in their ability to recognize absence of abuse in the four vignettes representing no abuse. Not all children were able to recognize the absence of potential abuse in the four non-abusive scenarios. There was a range of 22%-36% incorrect responses for the four vignettes representing no abuse. Children had most difficulty identifying absence of abuse in vignette #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures. Most of the incorrect responses indicated that the boy should leave his overcoat on because he may want it on for the picture. These incorrect responses seemed to reflect an issue of control over the outcome of the photo, rather than an indication of potential abuse. Other children indicated that if the boy followed the photographer's request and removed his overcoat, then the boy would be asked to remove other articles of clothing. One possible explanation why children projected harm into this scenario is that there was another vignette that involved a girl being asked to take her clothes for a picture (vignette #1 Uncle Taking Pictures). Since both of these situations involved a request to remove clothes for a picture, children may have projected the harm recognized in vignette #1 to vignette #7. It could be dangerous for all if children project harm into nonabusive situations. First, adults could be falsely accused of abuse, and encounter legal difficulties and possible loss of job. Next, if a child continues to falsely report potential abuse, adults may not give as much credibility to a true report of potential abuse. The child may become frustrated that the adult does not believe the report and not report it again. 126 Effects of Specific Vignette CmLaCteristics on Recogg'tion Competencies Adult familiarig. Hypothesis 2 stated that children would be able to recognize potential abuse for vignettes with unknown adults better than with known adults. This hypothesis was not statistically supported by the results. Children's competency to recognize potential abuse for situations involving known adults did not differ significantly from their competency to recognize potential abuse for situations involving unknown adults. The mean Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score (M=2.83) was not significantly different from the mean Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score (M=3.10). These results are counter to findings in existing literature. The structure of the recognition scores may account for this. The Recognize Abuse-Known Adult score and the Recognize Abuse-Unknown Adult score were each the sum of two vignettes about potential abuse and two vignettes about no abuse. As found in hypothesis one, children were better able to recognize potential abuse for situations with unknown adults than with known adults, when presented with the four potentially abusive situations. This supported Finkelhor and Strapko's (1992) finding that children have more difficulty recognizing potential abuse when the adult is known than when the adult is unknown. Children did not differ much in their ability to recognize absence of abuse for unknown or known adults when presented with the four non-abusive situations. Therefore, when the recognition scores for both potentially abusive and non-abusive scenarios were combined for analysis, a statistically significant difference was not found between known and unknown adults as it may have been if they were analyzed separately. It is recommended that the null not be accepted until this hypothesis can be tested again. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) stated that the concept of ”stranger danger" has been the emphasis of abuse prevention education in the past. Children have been found to be more aware of strangers as potential abusers, yet have difficulty with the concept that 127 known people can be abusers (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). This misconception can be problematic because most perpetrators of child abuse are known adults. Gentkr of chfl character. Hypothesis 3 stated that children would be able to recognize potential abuse for vignettes with female children better than with male children. This hypothesis was supported by the results. Children were significantly better able to recognize potential abuse when presented with situations that involved female children, than when presented with situations that involved male children. The mean Recognize Abuse-Girl score (M=3.13) was significantly higher than the Recognize Abuse-Boy score (M=2.80). In prevalence studies, the rate of child sexual abuse was found to be less for males than for females (Tobin, 1992; Baladerian, 1991; Finkelhor et al., 1990). Finkelhor (1990) stated sexual abuse of males has been underreported and the prevalence rate for males is higher than depicted in prevalence studies. If males are seen as less likely victims of child sexual abuse, the concept that male children can be potential victims may not be emphasized in prevention education as strongly as it is emphasized for female children. Typically, examples of sexually abusive situations involve male perpetrators with female victims. This may be reflected in the curriculum of sexual abuse prevention education. In turn children may view males as less likely victims of abuse and therefore, have had more difficulty identifying a situations with male children as potentially abusive. _Elepta of Specific Sabject Chaiacteristig on Recogflion Competencies Subject sex. Hypothesis 4 stated that there would be no effect of subject sex on knowledge to recognize potential abuse. This hypothesis was supported by the results. There was no significant difference between male (M=6.0) and female subjects (M=5.8) regarding their total Recognize Abuse score. Previous research regarding gender effects on learning prevention concepts varied and no conclusions were drawn (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). The results of this study 1% indicated that male and female subjects acquired recognition competencies at the same rate of proficiency. This finding may reflect educational efforts to reduce gender bias in instruction. Both males and females may have been given equal opportunity to learn prevention concepts. Grade level. Hypothesis 5 stated that children in higher grades would be able to recognize potential abuse better than children in lower grades. This hypothesis was supported to a degree by the results. The total Recognize Abuse score was dependent on the grade level of the subject. Specifically, 5th graders (M=6.71) were significantly better at recognizing potential abuse, than both 3rd graders (M=5.11) and 4th graders (M=5.68). The 7th graders (M=6.27) were significantly better than the 3rd graders (M=5.11). In general, when significant differences were found between grade levels, higher grade levels were better than lower ones at recognizing potential abuse. The 6th graders (M=5.89) did not differ significantly from any of the other grades. Research findings from Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) indicated that some children learned prevention concepts better that others. In general, they found that older children learned them better than younger children. The results of this study supported the findings of this research. It is troublesome that younger children cannot recognize potential abuse as well as older children, since younger children are at greater risk for being victims of abuse (Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). These results reinforce the need to design prevention efforts to meet the developmental needs of a child. Krivacska (1990), Benick and Gilbert (1991) and Melton (1993), stressed the importance of determining the age children are best able to absorb different concepts and lessons about prevention. They stated that prevention programs needed to incorporate insights from cognitive and developmental theories when designing curricula Insights gained from feminist theories could help prescribe the skills and knowledge that children should posses to protect themselves, and theories of cognitive 129 development could reveal the extent to which children can master these lessons in light of their developmental level (Melton, 1993). _Eflcational status. Hypothesis 6 stated that children in regular education would be able to recognize potential abuse better than children in special education. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. Special education (M=5.8) and regular education students (M=6.0) did not differ significantly regarding their ability to recognize potential abuse when presented with the eight vignettes. These results appear to contradict findings in existing literature. Researchers stated that individuals with disabilities are at greater risk for abuse than their nondisabled peers because they do not learn prevention concepts as well (Muccigrosso, 1991; Tobin, 1992, Baladerian, 1991). One possible explanation why there was no significant difference between these two groups is that the subjects in each group did not accurately represent these populations. The subjects in the special education group may only represent the students with mild impairment. The more mildly impaired special education population may not differ in their ability to acquire prevention concepts. A difference between regular education and special education groups may have been found if it was possible to randomly select students from each population to represent the full range of abilities in each group. Another possible explanation is that there are within subject factors that may influence acquisition of recognition competencies more so than the between groups factor of educational status. Finkelhor and Suapko (1992) stated that it may be more effective to study children individually, rather than solely by group factors, to help understand why some children do not learn and retain these concepts. Some individual factors that were suggested for further investigation were cognitive ability, social adaptability, locus of control, and self-esteem (Finkelhor, 1990; Finkelhor & Baron, 1986). According to the existing literature, students with disabilities are more vulnerable to abuse than their non-disabled peers and have greater difficulty acquiring prevention 130 concepts (Muccigrosso, 1991). The absence of difference found between the regular education and Special education groups may reflect the improved instructional efforts of special education teachers. Since the special education population tends to be at greater risk for abuse, special education teachers may have worked to improve their instructional efforts in this area; therefore, the knowledge gap between regular and special education groups did not exist. Interaction effects of subject sex, grade, and educational status. Hypothesis 7 stated that there would be an interaction effect of subject sex, grade and educational status on general knowledge to recognize potential abuse. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. An examination of the total competency score for all eight vignettes showed no interaction effects for subject sex, grade and educational status. Grade level was the only subject characteristic found to effect general recognition knowledge. Children's general recognition knowledge was dependent on grade level regardless of children's sex and educational status. Although no interaction effects were found between subject groups when the total recognition score was utilized, interaction effects were found when prevention concepts were examined separately. A discussion of the interaction effects of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics will follow. These results indicate that there may be other factors besides children's sex and educational status that can provide more insight into acquisition of prevention concepts. These factors may include, cognitive functioning, social skills, and self-esteem. In addition, the fact that significant interaction effects of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics on recognition knowledge were found, indicates that certain groups of children learn certain concepts better than other groups of children. Therefore, when examining acquired recognition knowledge, it may be more informative to examine the various components of recognition knowledge rather than examining it as one general concept. 131 Interaction Elfl‘ects of Vi gene Characteristics with Subject Characteristics on Recogrition Comgtencies The interaction of subject characteristics and vignette characteristics were analyzed although no hypotheses were formulated. A discussion of these results are presented. In_te_rac_tion effects of abuse level and subject characteristics. No significant interaction effects for the vignette characteristic of abuse level with subject characteristics were found. Children were no better at recognizing abuse when presented with potentially abusive situations than at recognizing absence of abuse when presented with non-abusive situations. The reason for including a set of vignettes representing non-abusive situations was to check for hypervigilance. If all of the vignettes represented potential abuse, it would be difficult to determine if children could differentiate between abusive and non-abusive situations. As discussed previously, hypervigilance can have detrimental effects on the people falsely accused of abuse and on the children that misidentif y abuse. The results indicated that subjects presented a degree of hypervigilance, since not all children were able to recognize absence of abuse in the non-abusive situations. There is a need to improve instructional methods aimed at helping children recognize situations that are potentially abusive as well as situations that are not considered abusive. It may be difficult for children to differentiate between abusive and non-abusive situations because there are few absolute rtrles about touching. For example, children learn that it is acceptable for the doctor to touch their private parts during an examination, but it is not acceptable for their parents to touch their private parts unless they need to for medical reasons, or if they need assistance bathing. Mon effects of adult fainiliarity andLsubject characteristics A significant two-way interaction pattern was found for the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity with the subject characteristic of educational status. Regular education students were better at recognizing potential abuse for unknown adults (M=3.24) than for 132 known adults (M=2.77). This pattern was not present for special education students. The special education group were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for known (M=2.92) and unknown adults (M=2.88). In addition, the recognition scores for known adults were about the same for both regular education (M=2.77) and special education groups (M=2.92), where as, the recognition score for unknown adults was higher for the regular education group (M=3.24), than for the special education group (M=2.88). Literature regarding sexual abuse prevention for individuals with disabilities suggests that children with disabilities may have less knowledge regarding prevention concepts when compared with their non-disabled peers (Muccigrosso, 1991). Tharinger et al. (1990) stated that children segregated into special education may not receive the same sexual abuse information as their nondisabled peers. If they are mainstreamed they may have this education, but at a level that they are unable to comprehend. Children with disabilities may not be able to recognize potentially abusive situations without appropriate prevention education instruction. The statements from this literature were not supported by the results of this study. Children's ability to recognize abuse with known and unknown adults depended on their educational status and sex. A significant interaction pattern was found for these three factors. Finkelhor and Strapko (1992) stated that children in general have greater difficulty recognizing potential abuse in situations where the adult is known. This finding was supported for the regular education children. Regular education students were significantly better at recognizing potential abuse in situations with unknown adults than in situations with known adults. This was not supported for special education children. Special education students were no better at recognizing potential abuse in situations with known adults than in situations with unknown adults. Their recognition scores for situations involving known adults and situations involving unknown adults were equal to regular education children's scores for situations involving known adults. 133 These results may support the literature that special education children do not grasp some prevention concepts as well as their nondisabled peers. They were not as good as their nondisabled peers at recognizing potential abuse for unknown adults. The regular education children had more difficulty recognizing potential abuse for known adults, and the special education population was about equal to them. These results do support the literature that indicates a difference in acquisition of prevention concept for regular and special education students. Although this difference was not found when examining all prevention concepts together, when examining them separately a difference was found for the concept of adult familiarity. Intgraction effects of child gender and subject characteristics. There was a significant three-way interaction between the vignette characteristic of child gender and subject characteristics of sex and educational status. The interaction pattern between subjects' educational status and sex depended on the gender of the child in the vignette. Male regular education students were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls (M=3.44) rather than boys (M=2.78) were represented in vignettes, and male special education students were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for boy (M=2.90) vignettes and girl vignettes (M=2.80). This pattern was reversed for female subjects. Female regular education students were able to recognize potential abuse about the same for boy (M=2.93) vignettes and girl (M=2.87) vignettes, and female special education students were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls (M=3.33) were represented in the vignettes rather than boys (M=2.57). Again a specific interaction effect was found for subjects' educational status. Children's ability to recognize abuse for male versus female children in the vignettes was dependent on their gender and their educational status. According to the literature, the findings regarding effects of gender on acquisition of prevention concepts varied and no conclusions were drawn (Finkelhor & Strapko, 1992). These studies may have only examined the main effect of children's gender on their acquisition of knowledge. This 134 study found a significant interaction effect for gender when it was examined in conjunction with two other variables, subject's educational status and a specific aspect of the recognition competency. Finkelhor (1990) and Finkelhor and Baron (1986) stated that more research is needed to examine the interaction effects of multiple subject characteristics when examining acquisition of prevention concepts. Both female special education and male regular education children were better at recognizing potential abuse when girls where involved in the scenarios than when males were involved. These effects were not found for female regular education and male special education subjects, who had about the same level of knowledge regardless of child's gender in the vignette. Methodological limitation discussed previously may account for these findings. In addition, there could be other individual characteristics present in these groups that were not identified or measured by this study that may help explain the differences found. Hypotheses RegardirgCompetencies to Avoid Potential Abuse Existing literature related to acquisition of prevention concepts focused on recognition competencies. Finkelhor (1990) and Finkelhor and Baron (1986) stated that children's ability to avoid sexual victimization needed to be examined as well as with their ability to recognize potential abuse. There was no previous research on which to base the hypotheses regarding acquisition of avoidance competencies. For the purpose of developing hypotheses for this section, this researcher assumed that acquisition of avoidance competencies would be similar to acquisition of recognition competencies. Descrgytion of General Avoida_nce Competencies Hypothesis 8 stated that children's knowledge regarding avoidance of potential abuse would vary and their knowledge would depend on the situations represented in the vignettes. This hypothesis was partially supported by the results. The mean Avoid Abuse- Abusive score for each vignette was less than 4.0, indicating that not all subjects were able 135 to develop avoidance strategies that included all four avoidance steps. There was no significant difference among mean Avoid Abuse-Abusive scores for these four vignettes. Children did differ in their ability to develop avoidance strategies when presented with potentially abusive situations. When examining the avoidance scores for each vignette, the findings indicated that no children were able to state the four avoidance steps, say no, go, tell, and keep telling, when presented with any of the potentially abusive situations. The greatest percentage of subjects, 40%-75%, were able to state only one of the four avoidance steps in the avoidance strategies they developed. In most situations, children were able to identify the need to say no to the potentially abusive gesture. One explanation for this is that children hear the statement " j ust say no" in a variety of contexts. Drug education is one curricular area that has professed this attitude in the past. Mass media has reinforced the concept of ”just say no” on billboards and in television adds. Although children are taught there are four steps to include in an avoidance strategy, only the first step, say no, may be remembered because it is reinforced in areas other than prevention education. Only 11-21% of the children were able to state the first three steps for the four vignettes. For example, when children were presented with vignette #1 Uncle Taking Pictures, 53% of the children stated they would refuse; only 21% recognized the need to add they would also leave, and tell an adult about the incident. Each one of the avoidance steps play an important role in the protection of a child. Concern should be raised when children are not able to correctly develop avoidance strategies that include at least the first three steps. The first step, refuse, is important because children need to let potential abusers know that they are aware the situation is not acceptable. If a child doesn't make some statement of refusal, the adult may not be sure the child knows the behavior is abusive and the perpetrator may more readily try it again with that child. This concept is important because the largest number of perpetrators are known adults and could have numerous opportunities to abuse the child. 136 The next step, leave the situation and go to a safe place, is also important for children to include in their avoidance strategy. If they refuse, yet stay in the situation, there may be a greater chance that the perpetrator might continue to display the abusive behavior. Once children refuse and leave, it is important they follow this by telling a trusted adult. If they fail to tell, the perpetrator has a greater chance to approach that child or another child in the future. The last step, keep telling until someone believes you, was not included in any of the children's avoidance strategies. This could be explained in two ways. It may be that the design of the strategy to elicit this information was not adequate to elicit this knowledge. An additional question may need to be included to elicit what children would do if an adult doesn't believe them. Another possible explanation is that children would not continue to disclose about the potential abusive situation, if the first adult did not believe them. Children may believe that all adults would believe them and they would never have to tell anyone else. This is not a realistic view to foster in children. Prevention curricula include this step because some adults do have difficulty believing a child has been abused, especially if the abuser is a person they know well and trust. Abuse prevention efforts need to improve education regarding these four avoidance steps. The " just say no“ tactic is not effective for protection against abuse. Children need to learn the importance of going beyond this first step. Although there were no significant differences between the total avoidance scores for the four vignettes, there was an interesting result that warranted further exploration. The percentage of children that included only one avoidance step in their strategy ranged from 40%-75%. Children had the most difficulty including more than one strategy for vignette #4 Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in Bathroom. This vignette represented a male child that used a wheelchair. An examination of the subject responses indicated that most children thought the boy should just say no and then go to the bathroom. This type of response may reflection a perception that children in wheelchairs are not mobile and could 137 not leave the situation. This would be in line with a larger societal misperception that individuals with disabilities are helpless and cannot care for themselves. It would be interesting to examine how children with various physical disabilities view their ability to avoid potential abuse. Children with limited mobility may need to learn adaptive ways to implement the four avoidance steps. The mean Not Avoid-Non-Abusive score for each vignette representing no abuse was less than 4.0. This indicated that not all subjects were able to recognize that there was no need to avoid these situations. There were significant differences for mean Not Avoid- Non-Abusive scores among the four vignettes. Subjects had more difficulty recognizing that they did not have to avoid the situation presented in vignette #7 School Photographer Taking Pictures (43% of responses correct), when compared with vignette #5 Teacher Praising Student (74% of responses correct), vignette #6 Doctor Examining Injury (67% of responses correct), and vignette #8 Man Holding Door Open at the Mall (76% of responses correct). These results may be explained by the reasons children gave for what they would do if confronted with the situation represented in vignette #7. A large number of children viewed this situation as an issue of individual rights. They stated that the boy had the right to have his picture taken any way he wanted. The 48% of children that stated the child should refuse the photographer's request for him to remove his outer coat may reflect the subjects quest for independence rather than their belief the situation is abusive. Eff_ec_ts of Spcific Vigpette Characteristfis on Avoida_nce Competencies Adult farniliariiy. Hypothesis 9 stated that children would be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes with unknown adults better than with known adults. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. The pattern of results was opposite of the hypothesized relationship. Children were able to develop avoidance strategies significantly 138 better for situations involving known adults (M=8.80), than for situations with unknown adults (M=7.65). The existing literature regarding acquisition of prevention knowledge focused on recognition competencies and not on avoidance competencies. Without existing literature regarding acquisition of avoidance strategies, this researcher assumed that children's avoidance competencies and recognition competencies relating to adult f arniliarity would be the same. These research findings did not support this. Children were better at developing avoidance strategies when the vignettes represented known adults than when they represented unknown adults. One possible explanation is that children have more experience negotiating through abusive situations with known adults because of personal experience or immediately observed experiences of abuse of siblings, friends, and other relatives. Known adults are more commonly perpetrators of abuse. Therefore, some subjects may have more experience in developing strategies to successfully avoid abuse with known adults than with unknown adults. This is only one possible explanation; more research is needed in the area of acquisition of avoidance strategies to help explain the results in this section. Child gender. Hypothesis 10 stated that children would be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse for vignettes with female children better than with male children. This hypothesis was supported by the results. Children were able to develop avoidance strategies significantly better for situations involving female children (M=9.15), than for situations involving male children (M=7.30). These results indicated that children were better at developing avoidance strategies for situations involving girls when compared to situations involving boys. Acquisition of avoidance competencies was similar to acquisition of recognition competencies with regards to this concept. 139 This finding is interesting in that it contradicts an aspect of gender socialization. Males are typically raised to f i ght of f intruders, f i ght f or what they believe, and aggressively resist enemies. Females, in turn, are more often socialized into acquiescing and being more passive. The results of this study found that children were better able to develop avoidance strategies for girls than for boys. This may be a reflection a change in socialization of males and females in today's society. m of Specific Sugbject Characteristics on Avoidance Competencies Subject Sex. Hypothesis 11 stated that there would be no effect of subject sex on knowledge to avoid potential abuse. This hypothesis was supported by the results. There was no significant difference between male and female subjects' competency to develop avoidance strategies. The mean total Avoid Abuse score for male subjects was (16.92) and the score for female subjects was (15.98). There was no existing literature regarding gender effects on acquisition of avoidance competencies. The results from existing literature related to gender effects on acquisition of recognition competencies varied and no conclusions regarding gender effect were drawn. As for recognition competencies, there was no gender effects on acquisition of general avoidance competencies. These results may reflect a trend in education to reduce gender biased instruction. Instructional efforts may have been revised to allow for equal learning opportunities for both boys and girls in this area. As suggested for recognition competencies, more research is needed to explore gender effects on acquisition of avoidance competencies. Grade level. Hypothesis 12 stated that children in higher grade levels would be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse better than children in lower grades. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. Subjects' grade level did not have a significant effect on competencies to develop avoidance strategies. The total Avoid Abuse mean scores for each I40 grade level were 3rd grade (M=16.78), 4th grade (M=15.90), 5th grade (M=16.30), 6th grade (M=16.37), and 7th grade (M=16.9l). Although there was a grade level effect for acquisition of recognition competencies there was not one for avoidance competencies. These results indicated that children's acquisition of avoidance strategies are not dependent on grade. This result was not expected The existing literature related to acquisition of prevention concepts indicated that older children learn some concepts better than younger ones. Acquisition of avoidance competencies may be one area that is not affected by grade. More research is needed to help understand why children's knowledge in this area doesn't increase with age as would be expected. This would be a problem if children's knowledge in this area did not improve with age. If children's avoidance competencies are inadequate in the lower grades they would remain inadequate as children progressed through school. An exploration of curriculum and teaching methods in this area may help to provide insight into this problem. Educational status. Hypothesis 13 stated that children in regular education would be able to develop strategies to avoid potential abuse better than children in special education. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. Special education students (M=16.32) and regular education students (M=16.55) did not differ significantly regarding competencies to develop avoidance strategies. An educational status difference was not found. This may be because the group of special and regular education students were not representative of these populations. As mentioned in the limitations section, the higher ability students in each group may have been recruited. Therefore, children in special education may not have had such severe disabilities to make a difference between groups. There may also be some within group factors not examined in this study that are more important in acquisition of avoidance 141 competencies. These individual factors were discussed in the section on recognition competencies. These results may also reflect improved instructional efforts in the area of special education. Recently, there has been more attention educationally and in the media regarding the sexual abuse of children with disabilities. This increased awareness of children with disabilities as victims of sexual abuse, may have motivated educators to improve prevention instruction for children with disabilities. Mon effect of subject sex, gr_adeI and educational status . Hypothesis 14 stated that there would be an interaction effect of subject sex, grade, and educational status on general knowledge to avoid potential abuse. This hypothesis was not supported by the results. There were no significant interactions of subject sex, grade, and educational status on the general competency to develop avoidance strategies. There were, however, significant interaction effects for subject characteristics and vignette characteristics. Similar results were found for recognition and avoidance competencies. There were no interaction effects for the between group factors of sex, grade, and educational status when the prevention competency was examined as a singular concept. Interaction effects were found when the prevention competency was broken down into specific prevention concepts. Therefore, acquired knowledge is dependent on both subject characteristics and vignette characteristics. An exploration of within subject factor may give more insight into acquisition of avoidance competencies. Interaction Effects of Vigpette Characteristics with Subject Chmcten'gtig on Avoidance Comgtencies The interactions of subject characteristics with vignette characteristics were analyzed, although no hypotheses were formulated. This section presents these results. 142 Adult f amiliariiy. There was a significant interaction for the vignette characteristic of adult familiarity with sex of subject. Results indicated that both male (M=9.27) and female (M=8.33) subjects were better at developing avoidance strategies for known adults, than for unknown adults (males, M=7.65) (females, M=7.64). However, the male (M=9.27) subjects were better than the female (M=8.33) subjects when known adults were characterized. These results add information to the research regarding effects of gender on acquisition of prevention knowledge. Males and females general knowledge regarding abuse prevention appeared to be the same, but their knowledge regarding specific concepts differed. This reinforces the need for prevention education assessment that can identify acquisition of specific prevention concepts. Another two-way interaction involved the vignette characteristic of adult f arniliarity with educational status of subject. The results indicated that regular education subjects' avoidance competencies were about the same for known (M=8.48) and unknown adults (M=8.06), while the special education subjects were better at developing avoidance strategies for known adults (M=9.29) than for unknown adults (M=7.02). These results do not support the literature regarding effects of educational status on acquisition of prevention knowledge. These results may reflect methodological limitations previously mentioned. Another explanation could be that special educators have improved their instructional efforts regarding this issue. The literature stated that children do not recognize abuse as well with known people. Since children with disabilities are at high risk for abuse, and the most common perpetrator is known to the child, the concept of a known adult as a potential abuser may have been reinforce for the special education children. Therefore the special education group may have had more knowledge regarding this concept. 143 Child gender. There were no significant interactions for subject characteristics with vignette characteristic of child gender. There was a main effect of child gender on acquisition of avoidance competencies, although no interaction effects were found. This result may be due to previously mentioned methodological limitations. It could also indicate that children regardless of age, sex, and educational status are better at developing avoidance strategies for situations involving girls than for situations involving boys. These results may indicate that the societal view of females as victims may be internalized by children regardless of their age, sex, and educational status. Implications for Practice and Suggestions for Future Research This section began with a discussion of the study limitations. One limitation related to the difficulty in recruiting subjects at the school personnel level. Many school officials stated that some parents were not supportive of prevention education being taught in the schools, and that research in this area would not be well received. It would be interesting to study parental attitudes toward prevention education and their knowledge in this area. This may provide insights into why some parents do not support this type of education. Parents may be found to have misconceptions about this type of instruction that can then be changed. Because parental support is a key component of a successful prevention program, it would be beneficial to study parental attitudes and knowledge regarding this type of education. Another recommendation is to replicate this study with a few modifications. One suggestion would be to recruit a larger number of subjects that would be more representative of the group factors under study. In addition, an examination of the effects of individual factors such as social adaptability and cognitive ability on acquisition of prevention knowledge may provide helpful insights into knowledge acquisition. The Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy was designed to elicit and describe children's knowledge, it was not specifically designed to study the 144 effects of isolated vignette characteristics on acquisition of knowledge. It may be helpful to modify the existing KSAPAS instrument to more effectively study specific vignette characteristics, such as adult familiarity. The results of this study indicated that a large number of children have not acquired certain prevention concepts, and could benefit from an assessment of their prevention knowledge. It may be beneficial to design a group format for the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy. The administration of this instrument would be more time eff icient. Most of the literature reviewed for this study discussed recognition competencies and did not address avoidance competencies directly. One possible explanation for this is that it was assumed that children would have acquired both of these competencies in a similar manner. The results of this study indicated that children differed in their acquisition of both competencies. Further research which attempts to examine acquisition of prevention concepts should study each of these competencies separately to help provide insight into how better to instruct children in each of them. The focus of this study was to examine children's acquired prevention knowledge. Further research is needed to examine the effects of specific instructional methodology on acquisition. The interaction effects of various subject characteristics and instructional characteristics on acquisition need to be examined to provide insights into how to best meet the instructional needs of children. One purpose of this study was to develop a strategy to assess children's prevention knowledge. Further research is needed to develop effective prevention education assessments that are available to schools. The schools recnrited for this study did not have an assessment component as part of their prevention program, and were supportive that one was being developed. Children are required to obtain a certain level of proficiency in some cunicular areas but prevention education is not one of them. What message does this give to children, teachers, and parents? It may give the message that prevention education is 145 being taught because it has been mandated, and it doesn't matter if the concepts have been acquired as long as the minimum instructional requirements are met. A discussion of proficiency level will follow in the conclusion section. Conclusions The purpose of this study was to explore children's knowledge to recognize potential abuse and develop strategies to avoid potential abuse. The Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy was developed to assess children's knowledge in these areas. The results of this study indicated that this strategy appears to successfully identify prevention concepts that were acquired and those that were not. This strategy also provided inf orrnation regarding the misconceptions children had regarding these prevention concepts. The information gathered by this assessment strategy can help provide valuable inf orrnation to improve cuniculum and instructional methodology in these areas. The results of this study indicated that children's knowledge regarding these concepts varied. The effects of between group factors for children's grade, sex, and educational status on acquisition of recognition and avoidance competencies were examined. Children's recognition competencies were dependent on children's grade level. In general, those in higher grades acquired more knowledge than those in lower grades. Knowledge regarding recognition of potentially abusive situations did not differ significantly for male and female subjects, and for special education and regular education subjects. There were no effects of sex, grade, or educational status as measured in this study on acquisition of avoidance competencies. The within subject effects for vignette characteristics of abuse level, adult familiarity, and child gender, on recognition and avoidance competencies were examined. Children were equally able to recognize potential abuse as they were able to recognize absence of abuse. When presented with vignettes representing both potentially abusive and non- abusive situations, children's recognition knowledge did not differ significantly when the 146 situation represented a known adult and when it represented an unknown adult. Similar results were found when examining avoidance competencies. Limitations in study design that were delineated in the discussion might account for the failure to obtain significant differences as expected. Results indicated that children were significantly better at recognizing potential abuse when the child in the situation is a girl rather than a boy. Similar results were found for acquisition of avoidance competencies. There were a few significant interaction effects for subject characteristics with vignette characteristics for both recognition and avoidance competencies. These results need to be interpreted with caution since the cell size was small for certain groups. Based on this study, no definitive statements can be drawn about these interrelationships, yet they can provide directions for further research. The focus of this paper was to describe the knowledge children have acquired regarding recognition and avoidance prevention knowledge. The issue of proficiency regarding acquisition of these competencies has not been a major focus in the literature. It is the belief of this researcher that a 100% mastery of the core concepts included in the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment should be required of every child. This would require an assessment of a child's present knowledge, identification of concepts not acquired, and remedial instruction designed to meet the child's education needs in this area. This type of assessment and remedial instruction process is done in other curricular areas. Children are expected to be able to read, write, and do mathematics at a certain level before they can progress through school. Why haven't similar mastery requirements been developed for prevention education cuniculum? What effect could it have on children if they do not acquire these core concepts? Finkelhor and Strapko's (1992) research indicated that abuse prevention education was found to be an effective method to help children recognize and avoid potential abuse when presented with actual abusive situations. A 147 logical extrapolation is that children who do not learn these concepts are not as successful at recognizing and avoiding potentially abusive situations. The requirement of 100% mastery on the Knowledge of Sexual Abuse Prevention Assessment Strategy may seem like a high standard at first. It may not be unreasonable since this strategy assesses only the basic concepts taught regarding recognition and avoidance of potential abuse. Each concept is very important to acquire and it would difficult to state that it is acceptable for a child to acquire only partial knowledge regarding these concepts. These concepts build on each other and failure to acquire one of them may produce a weak link in the child's knowledge required to recognize and avoid a potentially abuse situation. In conclusion, the KSAPAS was able to elicit children's knowledge regarding recognition and avoidance of potential abuse. The strategy designed for this study was able to identify and describe children's acquired knowledge, as well as their missing knowledge and misconceptions. In general, children were found to vary in their prevention knowledge. The results from this study can provide insights to improve curricular design and instructional efforts in the area of prevention education. 148 APPENDIX A Core Concepts Of Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Cunicula 1. Touch distinctions: Teaches the difference between good, bad, and confusing touches 2. Rules about touching: Children have the right to say "no" to touches they do not want, even to adults 3. Body boundaries: Children learn the private pans of their bodies 4. Types of abuse: Children learn the types of behaviors that are considered sexually abusive (a) no one has the right to take pictures of you without your clothes on (b) no one has the right to touch your private parts (c) no one has the right to ask you to touch their private parts (d) no one has the right to ask to look at your private parts (e) no one has the right to ask you to look at their private parts Children learn that it is not right for someone to trick or bribe them into doing something they do not want to do 5. Types of abusers Abusers can be strangers or people that you know Abusers can be any age Abusers can be males and females 6. Permissible situations for others to touch or look at you without clothes Children learn to differentiate between abusive behaviors, loving and caring touches, and medically necessary touches Exceptions to rules about looking at and touching private pans of your body (a) it is permissible for a medical person to look at or touch private parts of your body for the purpose of a medical exam ll 149 (b) it is permissible for a parent or caretaker to help you bath if you cannot do it yourself (c) it is permissible for a parent or caretaker to put medicine on your private parts if you are sick or injured 7. Avoidance skills: Children learn four steps to protect themselves from potentially abusive situations (a) say “no”, refuse to participate (b) leave the situation if you are able (c) tell a trusted adult about what happened (d) if the adult does not believe you, tell another trusted adult, and continue to tell until someone believes you 8. Secrecy: Children learn that no one has the right to ask you to keep a secret about abusive situations 9. Blame: Children learn that no matter what happens, it is not their fault Summarized from Michigan Department of Education (1992) Michigan Model of Comprehensive School HeaLh Education, Grades K-8. 150 APPENDIX B Expert Judge Rating Form For Vignettes Name of Rater: Part I Directions: Please answer the following questions for each vignette. 1. Do you think that children between the ages of 8— 13 would understand this vignette if it was read to them? Yes No if no, please explain why 2. Do you think that the situation presented in the vignette is realistic? Yes No if no, please explain why 3. Do you think the potential harm in this situation is obvious? Yes No if no, please explain why 4. Do you think this situation is potentially harmful? Yes No if no, please explain why 151 Part II Directions: Please rank order the 9 vignettes for degree of potential harm. Vignette Number (Most Potentially Harmful) (Least Potentially Harmful) 152 Vignettes to be Rated #1. Mary's parents were going out to dinner, so they asked Uncle Joe if he could watch Mary until they got home. Uncle Joe came to Mary's house and her parents went to dinner. She sat with Uncle Joe and watched TV. When a commercial came on about a camera, Uncle Joe said he had a camera in his pocket and wanted to see if it worked. Uncle Joe asked Mary if he could take some pictures of her. He said that her bright clothes would not look good in the picture, so he asked her to take off her clothes for the picture. #2. Patty was in her math class. Mrs. Smith was very proud of her class because they all did their best on the math test. When she gave the children their tests back, she put her hand on their shoulder and told them that she was very proud of them. #3. Jose was walking home from school. When he was walking past his neighbor's house, Ms. Jones, she asked him to come inside her house. She told Jose that she just baked some chocolate chip cookies and wanted to give him some. Chocolate chip cookies were Jose's favorite so he decided to go inside to get some. When he went into her kitchen, Ms. Jones said that she hurt her arm and needed help getting dressed for work. She said that after Jose came up to her bedroom to help her change clothes, he could have some cookies. #4. Mike fell off the swing at the playground and hurt his hip. His mother took him to their doctor. When Mike and his mother went into the doctor's office, the doctor told Mike to take his pants off and lie on the examining table so he could look at his injured hip. #5. Latisha was walking home from school. A woman that she had never seen before, pulled up next to her in her van. She told her that her mother was very sick. She said that 153 her mother asked her to pick Latisha up and drive her to the hospital so she could be with her sick mother. #6. It was school picture day at Bobby's school. One at a time the students in his class went to the gym to have their pictures taken. When Bobby got to the gym, the photographer, Mr. Brook, asked Bobby to take his coat off for the picture, because it was covering the nice suit he was wearing. #7. Troy was shopping in the mall with his mother. He uses a wheelchair to move around because his legs don't work. He knows how to go to the bathroom by himself in the mall bathroom. He told his mother he was going to the bathroom and she waited outside the men's room door for him. When he got into the bathroom he noticed a man in there. The man told him that he would help him in the bathroom. The man said that he had a little boy in a wheelchair and knows that he needs help sometime when he goes to the bathroom. #8. Tasha and her friends were going shopping at the mall. When they got to the door of the mall, a man they did not know held the door open for them and said " good afternoon". #9. Lena was walking her dog at the town park. She saw some boys in her class coming towards her. These boy did not treat Lena very nice in school. They never asked her to play with them or they never talked with her. They only called her mean names. She liked one of the boys, Jeff. The boys came up to Lena and told her that they were having a party at Jeff‘s house and wanted her to follow them to the party and join them. They told her if she went with them to the party, she could have a date with Jeff. 154 APPENDIX C Vignette Illustrations 155 Vignette #1 l0 164 APPENDIX D Student Biographical Questionnaire Completed by Teacher Student ID # 1. Student gender: _Male _Female 2. Student age: _ 3. Student grade: __ 4. Check appropriate educational classification _Special Education (classification: ) _Regular Education 5. Please use the rating scale described below to rate how each statement describes this student. This can be an estimate based on your knowledge of the child in general Place the number from the rating scale that best describes the student next to each of the 5 statements. 0- I would never use this statement to describe this student. 1- This statement could be used to describe this student about 25% of the time 2- This statement could be used to describe this student about 50% of the time 3- This statement could be used to describe this student about 75% of the time 4— This statement could be used to describe this student all the time Descnjtive statement Number Mus scale a Socializes with peers on an age appropriate level a. b. Initiates interaction with peers b. c. Is teased by other students c. d. Is easily tricked or manipulated by others to do things he/she may not d want to do e. Interacts with adults at an age appropriate level e. (Please add any additional comments regarding the student's social behavior on the back of this sheet.) 165 6. Please estimate the student's ability in the following areas. This may be an estimate from the knowledge you have of the child's abilities in other areas. a. Ability to recognize situations that involves a threat to his/her personal safety when the perpetrator is using coercive tactics such as lying, bribing and trickery. above average average below average unable to estimate b. Ability to develop effective solutions intended to avoid the potential harm. _ above average average below average unable to estimate 7. Please estimate the student's level of general academic ability if compared to a national sample of age equivalent children in regular education classes (check the level that best describes the student). _Superior _High Average _Average _Low Average _Very Low Average 166 APPENDIX E Student Biographical Questionnaire Completed by Researcher I. If a standard instrument has been given to assess the student's adaptive behavior, please complete this item (this information may be available in the IEP). If not, leave it blank. a Name of assessment instrument b. Date Administered 0. Briefly describe results of assessment; 2. If the student has been given an IQ test, please check the descriptor for that score. IQ Descriptor Label (check one). If not sure of label, then write IQ range. ( - ) Superior High Average Average Low Average Borderline __ Mildly Impaired Moderately Impaired Severely Impaired 3. How many school years has this student received sex education (as prescribed by the school curriculum)? years (Will obtain best estimate if school records are not available) 4. How many hours total would you estimate the student has received sex education within the school? hours I67 5. Briefly describe the sex education the student has received in the past 5 years. (A brief summary of curricular goals/objectives from the cuniculum guide) 6. How many school years has this students received sexual abuse prevention education (as prescribed by the school curriculum)? years (Will obtain best estimate if school records are not available) 7. How many hours total would you estimate the student has received sexual abuse prevention education within the school? hours 8. Briefly describe the sexual abuse prevention education the student has received in the past 5 years. ( A brief summary of goals/objectives from the curriculum guide) 168 APPENDIX F Parent/Guardian Consent Form Dear Parents/Guardians, I am a graduate student from Michigan State University who is conducting a research project that is aimed at improving educational programs on personal safety for children. The specific purpose of this project is to create a method to describe a child's knowledge to recognize potential harm and develop solutions to avoid the harm. Some children are better able to avoid harmful situations such as drug use, problem behavior or sexual abuse. Other children may not be as good at detecting and avoiding these situations. It is important to develop a way to assess a child's knowledge to protect himself or herself, so educational programs can meet the child's individual needs. I am requesting your permission to allow your child to participate in this project. The following information describes what your child will be asked to do. This project will require about 20-30 minutes of your child's time. Only children in classrooms where teachers have agreed to participate will be involved in the project. Children who have agreed to participate will go to the guidance counselor's of free in the school to meet the researcher during a time when they will not miss school work. Children will be read eight short stories similar to the one below. They will be asked questions to obtain information, such as their ability to recognize potential harm. They will also be shown a picture which depicts the story to help them understand the situation. Sample Short Story Pam was walking home from the store. A man, who she did not know, drove up to her in his car. He told her that her mother asked him to drive her home because there was a storm coming and it was not safe to be walking outside. He told her to get into the car. (The accompanying picture would be a girl walking on the sidewalk with a car along side her and a man in the driver seat.) The children's responses to the interview questions will be audiotaped to make sure that answers are recorded correctly. The research results will be treated with confidence and the children will not be identified in reporting research findings. The child's teacher will complete an information sheet on the child's academic ability. This information will be summarized to describe the group involved in the project. Once the information sheet and the interview have been completed, the child will be assigned a number and any identifying information will be removed from the form. There will be no way to connect a child with any of their answers. Parents can be assured that I will follow the guidelines and procedures set up by the school to deal with situations involving students reporting abuse. 169 At the conclusion of the study, you and all participants will have access to a summary of the research findings. Participation in this research study is fully voluntary and participants may discontinue participation at anytime during the study without penalty. Children have the right to decline to answer any questions, or to stop the interview at any time. If you have any questions concerning your participation in this study please feel free to call Margaret Savage (Researcher) at 517 336—9770. If you wish for your child to participate in this study, please sign the consent below and return this form by (date) to your child's classroom teacher. Thank you for taking the time to read this consent form. I (parent! guardian) give my child (child's narne) permission to participate in the study described above. Parent/Guardian Signature Date Sincerely, Nancy Crewe, Ph.D. Margaret Savage Professor, Michigan State University Graduate Student, Michigan State University 170 APPENDIX G Teacher Consent Form DearTeacher, I am a graduate student from Michigan State University who is conducting a research project that is aimed at improving educational programs on personal safety for children. The specific purpose of this project is to create a method to describe a child's knowledge relating to detection and avoidance of potentially harmful situations. Some children are better able to avoid harmful situations such as drug use, problem behavior or sexual abuse. Other children may not be as good at detecting and avoiding these situations. It is important to develop a way to assess a child‘s knowledge to protect himself or herself, so educational programs can meet the child's individual needs. I am requesting your consent to participate in this research project In order for you to make an informed decision to participate I have outlined the research procedures below. This project will require about 20-30 minutes of your student's time. Only children whose teachers and parents have consented to participate will be involved in the project. Children who have agreed to participate will go to the guidance counselor's of free in the school to meet the researcher during a time when they will not miss school work. Children will be read eight short stories similar to the one below. They will be asked questions to obtain information, such as their ability to recognize potential harm. They will also be shown a picture which depicts the story to help them understand the situation. Sample Short Story Pam was walking home from the store. A man, who she did not know, drove up to her in his car. He told her that her mother asked him to drive her home because there was a storm coming and it was not safe to be walking outside. He told her to get into the car. (The accompanying picture would be a girl walking on the sidewalk with a car along side her and a man in the driver seat.) The children's responses to the interview questions will be audiotaped to make sure that answers are recorded correctly. The research results will be treated with confidence and the children will not be identified in reporting research findings. The child's teacher will complete an information sheet on the child's academic and social ability. This sheet should take about 10 minutes to complete for each child. No teacher will be asked to complete this form for more than 6 students. Therefore, the maximum amount of teacher time will be 1 hour. The information on this student biographical questionnaire will be summarized to describe the group involved in the project. Once the inf orrnation sheet and the interview have been completed, the child will be assigned a number and any identifying information will be removed from the form. There will be no way to connect a child with any of their 171 answers. Parents and teachers can be assured that I will follow the guidelines and procedures set up by the school to deal with situations involving students reporting abuse. At the conclusion of the study, you and all participants will have access to a summary of the research findings. Participation in this research study is fully voluntary and participants may discontinue participation at anytime during the study without penalty. Children have the right to decline to answer any questions, or to stop the interview at any time. If you have any questions concerning your participation in this study please feel free to call Margaret Savage (Researcher) at 517 336-9770. If you wish to participate in this study, please sign the consent below and return this f orrn by (date) to the school principal. Thank you for taking the time to read this consent form. I (teacher's name) give my consent to participate in the study described above. Teacher's Signature Date Sincerely, Nancy Crewe, Ph.D., Professor, MSU Margaret Savage, Graduate Student, MSU 172 APPENDIX H Recording Sheet for Interview Responses Student ID: Vignette Number: (order presented to child): Vignette Title: 1. What happened in the story I just read to you? 2. What do you think will happen next in this story? 3 . Why do you think that will happen next? 4 . What do you think (n_ame of victim ) should do in this situation? 173 APPENDIX I Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VigetteTitle: Uncle Taking Pictures Characteristics of Potenti_allv Sexu_allv Abusiye Sittgtion Description of Perpetrator". Known-Adult Male Relative Gender of Victim: Female Child Site: Victim's Home Inferred Method of Abuse: Taking Pictures of Victim when Unclothed Coercive Tactic: Trickery, Lying 1. Ability to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the man was a relative of the child c. stated that the man requested to take pictures of the girl with her clothes off (1. stated the reason given by the man for needing to take clothes off e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #1. 174 2. Ability to Recognize Potential Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. a. inferred that it is not right for him to ask her to take her clothes off __ b. inferred that it would not be safe for her to take her clothes off for the picture c. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing inf orrnation in the responses to Questions #2&3. 3. Ability to Develg; Effective Solutions Intended to Avoid Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #4. _ a. inferred that she should make some sign of refusal to participate b. inferred that she should make an attempt to remove herself from the situation c. inferred that she should tell someone she trusts about what happened d. inferred that she should keep telling until someone believes her e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing inf orrnation in the response to Question #4. 175 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VignetteTitle: Neighbor Bribing with Cookies Characteristics of Potentially Sexually Abusive Situation Description of Perpetrator“. Known-Adult Female Neighbor Gender of Victim: Male Child Site: In Neighbor's Home Inferred Method of Abuse: Perpetrator Exposing Self to Victim Coercive Tactic: Food Reward l. Abilig to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the woman was a neighbor c. stated that the woman wanted him to help her change clothes before he got cookies d. stated reason given by woman why she needed help changing clothes e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in response to Question #1. 176 2. Ability to Recognize Potential Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. __ a. inferred that it is not right for her to ask him to help her get dressed _ b. inferred that it would not be safe for him to go to her bedroom to help her change c. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in response to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Effective Solu_ti(£s Intended to Avoid 11% A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Question # 4. __ a inferred that he should make some sign of refusal to participate b. inferred that he should make an attempt to remove himself from the situation __ c. inferred that he should tell someone he trusts about what happened d. inferred that he should keep telling until someone believes him e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or mi$ing information in response to Question # 4. 177 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: Vignette'l'itle: Stranger in Van Ch__a_racterislcs of Potentially Sexually Abusive Sitgtion Description of Perpetrator“. Stranger-Adult Female Gender of Victim: Female Child Site: Stranger's Motor Vehicle Inferred Method of Abuse: Not Specifically Inferred in Vignette Coercive Tactic: Creating Fear, Lying l. Abilig to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the woman was a stranger __ c. stated the reason given by the woman why the girl had to go with her in the van (1. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #1. 178 2. .Ability to Recognize Potential Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. a. inferred that it is not right for the woman to tell the girl to get in the van b. inferred that it is not safe for the girl to go with a stranger in the van c. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Eff ect_ive Solutions Intended to Avoid Ha_rm_ A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #4. a. inferred that she should make some sign of refusal to participate b. inferred that she should make an attempt to remove herself from the situation c. inferred that she should tell someone she trusts about what happened d. inferred that she should keep telling until someone believes her e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #4. 179 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VignetteTitle: Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in Bathroom Manges of Potentially Sexually Abusive Situation Description of Perpetrator. Stranger-Adult Male Gender of Victim: Male Child Site: Public Men's Restroom Inferred Method of Abuse: Perpetrator Touching Victim Coercive Tactic: Trickery, Lying 1. Abilig to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the man was a stranger c. stated that the boy didn't need assistance to go to the bathroom d. stated that the man wanted to assist him in the bathroom e. stated reason given by man why he wanted to help him in the bathroom f. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #1. 180 2. Ability to Recrgnize Potential Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. a. inferred that it is not right for the man to help the boy when he didn't need help __ b. inferred that it would not be safe for the boy to let the man help him with toileting c. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Effective Solutions Intended to Avoid Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #4. a. inferred that he should make some sign of refusal to participate b. inferred that he should make an attempt to remove himself from the situation c. inferred that he should tell someone he trusts about what happened d. inferred that he should keep telling until someone believes him e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question # 4. 181 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VigetteTitle: Teacher Praising Student Characteristics of Non-Potentially Sexually Abusive Situation Description of Adult: Teacher-Adult Female Child Gender: Female Site: Classroom Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None 1. Ability to Comprehenq Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. _ a stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the woman was the child's teacher __ c. stated that the teacher touched the child on the shoulder while giving praise d. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question # l. 182 2. Ability to Recognize Potentiil Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. __ a. inferred that it is OK. for the teacher to touch the girl's shoulder b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Effective Solutions Intended to Avoid Har_;n_ A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #4. a. inferred that the situation is safe and nothing needs to be done b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #4. 1&3 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VignetteTitle: Doctor Examining Injury _Cflracteristics of Non-Potentially SexuallyAbusive Situation Description of Adult: Doctor-Known Adult Male Child Gender". Male Site: Doctor's Office Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None 1. Ability to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the man was the child's doctor c. stated that the child hurt his hip d. stated that the child and his mother went to the doctor '8 office together e. stated that the doctor asked him to remove his pants to examine the injured hip f. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question # l. 184 2. Ability to Recognize Potentijal Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. a inferred that it is safe for the doctor to examine the boy's injury b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Eflgciive Solutions Intended to Avoid Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question # 4. __ a. inferred that the situation is safe and nothing needs to be done to protect self b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question # 4. 185 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VignetteTitle: School Photographer Taking Pictures Qha__racterist_ics of Non-Potentially Sexually Abusive Situation Description of Adult: Stranger-School Photographer-Adult Male Child Gender". Male Site: School Gym Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None 1. Ability to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. __ a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the man was the school photographer c. stated that the photographer asked the boy to remove his coat for the picture d. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #1. 186 2. Ability to Recognize Potential Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. a. inferred that it is OK. for the photographer to ask the boy to remove his coat b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Effective Solutions Intended to Avoid Harm A. Check the statement below that best describes the response to Question #4. __ a inferred that the situation is safe and nothing needs to be done to protect self b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #4. 187 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VignetteTitle: Man Holding Door Open at the Mall Mtenstics of Non-Potentially Sexually Abusive Situation Description of Adult: Stranger-Male Child Gender. Female Site: Shopping Mall Inferred Method of Abuse: None Coercive Tactic: None 1. Ability to Comprehend Situation A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the man was a stranger c. stated that the man held the door for the girls and greeted them d. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #1. 188 2. Ability to Recoggze Poteng'al HE A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. _ a inferred that it is OK. for the man to hold the door open and greet the girls b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing inf orrnation in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Effective Solutions Intencfl to Avoid Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #4. a. inferred that the situation is safe and nothing needs to be done to protect self b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #4. 189 Interview Response Summary Sheet Student ID: VigietteTitle: Girl Invited to Party by Peers Qr_aracterist_ics of PotentiAly Sexually Abusive Situation Description of Perpetrators: Known- Male Peers Gender of Victim: Female Child Site: Outdoor Park Inferred Method of Abuse: Not Specifically Inferred in Vignette Coercive Tactic: Trickery, Offering Reward 1. Ability to Comprehend SituLtigt A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #1. a. stated the gender of the characters b. stated that the boys were not nice to her in school c. stated that Lena liked one of the boys (I. stated that the boys asked her to follow them to a party e. stated that they offered her a date with the boy she liked if she went to the party f. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #1. 190 2. Ability to Recognize Potential Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the responses to Questions # 2&3. _ a. inferred that it would not be safe for the girl to follow the boys to the party __ b. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the responses to Questions # 2&3. 3. Ability to Develop Eff egfive Solution_s Intended to Avoid Harm A. Check the accurate information below that was included in the response to Question #4. a. inferred that she should make some sign of refusal to participate b. inferred that she should make an attempt to remove herself from the situation c. inferred that she should tell someone she trusts about what happened d. inferred that she should keep telling until someone believes her e. other (describe) B. Describe inaccurate and/or missing information in the response to Question #4. 191 APPENDIX J Categorization Of Subjects Responses To Interview Questions Vignette: #l-Uncle Joe Taking Pictures Without Clothing (Potentially Abusive) Categorization of Subiect Responses to Questions #2 3nd #3 (Note: A hyphen, "-", was used to separate subject's responses to questions # 2 and #3 and questions #4 and #5. The subject response before the "-" is for the first question, and the subject response after the "-" is for the second question. If the "-" is absent, the same information was given for both questions.) Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child knows it is not right for the adult to make that request of the child " - if she was older she would say no because she would know it was wrong" (103) ”depends on her age. she might do it or might not because at a young age you are not taught and at an older age your usually taught about it" (08) " - it is not good to take your clothes off" (102, 64) ”she would not do it because it is not right” (100, 79, 74, 62. 55, 38, 02. 01) "her parents will not let her take off her clothes because it is not right, they want to protect her” (35) "he takes a picture and it is not right” (90) ”would be in school and learn not to do that with strangers but he isn't a stranger, and in school you learn not to do those things” (77) ”say no because it is not right to have someone take pictures of you naked" ('71) ”she said no because it is not very nice” (69) " - a lot of kids know better than to listen to adults when they want them to take off the clothes” (12) n=18 1.2 Response indicates the child knows the situation is not right because they identify the need to notify parents/authority "he will probably get in trouble because the parents will not get home - or she will do what he says and get in trouble" (95) ”she'll tell her mom and dad - it is wrong to take off your clothes" ('78. 67) ”the parents may not want him anymore because of what he said" (94) ”tell parents what happened - it is the right thing to do. you don't keep secrets" (28) ”there should be an emergency number to call”( 101) "she will tell authorities - I guessed" (l9) n=7 1.3 Response indicates the child knows it is not right to be naked but compromises by Mom "she says no I can change my clothes" (92) "she will probably take off her clothes because she was taught to mind her elders, but she shouldn't - she should change into more white clothes" L30) n=2 192 1.4 Response indicates the ”she tells him no and goes up to her room - because she doesn't n=10 child will not want to do the want to do it” (98, 51) action requested by the adult "she will refuse to do that - because it is disgusting to do that” (96) ”she wouldn't she will think it is gross for him to ask her” (46) "she may rim out of the house because she doesn't want to do that" (34) "she will say no I want to finish watching TV because she doesn't want to take off her clothes” (81) "say no because she doesn't want to" (54, 33, 20, 03) 1.5 Response indicates the "she would say I am uncomfortable taking off my clothes - it is n=4 child would not feel wrong taking pictures of someone without clothes" (85. 82) comfortable following the "she is uncomfortable naked and stuff - she should not do it - she request by the adult should say do it with my clothes on" (32) " - .she may not be comfortable with him taking pictures of her nude - " (22) 1.6 Response indicates the ”she would say no and wonder why her uncle wants her to do that" n=4 request from the adult (65) involves a coercive tactic ”she will leave her clothes on and have him take a picture with her clothes on - bright clothes don't ruin pictures and she will think it doesn't matter and leave her clothes on" (13) "he'll take pictures of her and do something to her or make her do something - because the clothes should go in the picture an why would he ask her to take them off" (07) ”say no because it doesn't feel right - because of the way he asked her, he wanted to take a picture of her, he said her clothes were too brifland he was trying to bribe her” (06) 1.7 Response indicates it ”she doesn't because it is a stupid thing to do” (86, 80, 11) n=5 would not be smart for the "if Mary was smart she wouldn't she might if she trusted him child to follow the request of when she shouldn't" (61) the adult "if she is smart she will say I don't feel right, or may want picture taken so bad that she will do anything" (05) 1.8 Response indicates the "probably take a picture of her - he is sick” (31) 1:4 adult is sick for making that "she will take her clothes off and he will take pictures of her naked request of a child and harass her and sexually abuse her - because he is probably a pervert and why would he want to take nude pictures of her, she is his niece" (16) "he will take pictures and I don't know maybe molest her or something - cause maybe he likes to do that to little girls” (14) "he takes a picture of her private parts because that is what it means if he asked her to take off her clothes. but I don't think she did” (‘76) 193 1.9 Response indicates it ”he will probably take the picture of her and sexually abuse n=12 would not be safe for the child her”(104) to follow the request of the "she doesn't do it because it is not good or safe” (73) adult "he might try to abuse her” (52) "she should call the police and tell them she was sexually abused" (47) "he'll try to do nasty things to her" (26) "hopefully she would say no - he would be molesting her or something” (25) "she will leave - it is not right or safe” (17) "he might take pictures of her and then do something bad to her" (43) ”she goes to her room - so her uncle doesn't do that to her” (93) "he might hurt her and might take other pictures and show them to his friends” (48) "he will probably hurt her and something cause he has already asked her to take off her clothes“ (21) ”she does it because he'll rape her" (75) 1.10 Response indicates it "she didn't know if it would hurt and she was afraid of the camera. n=l would be harmful in a manner something may happen to her eyes"(89) other than sexually abusive 1.11 Response indicates it is ”I think she will listen because Joe has more power” (49) n=1 not right for the adult to request that of a child because there is a power difference in the relationship 1.12 Response indicates it is "she will not take them off because it is private” (56) n=2 not right because the act ”she wouldn't because she has her own rights to protect herself " would infringe on the child's (41) rights for privacy/self- protection 1. 13 Response indicates it is ”say no because if she did her uncle would have pictures of her n=4 not right for the adult to naked"(53) request the act of the child ”say no. you can take pictures of something else - cause she because he is the uncle might not feel comfortable with her uncle taking pictures of her like that" (50) ”she wouldn't because that was her uncle and she would be naked and that would be gross to take pictures of her” (42) " - I think she will know it is wrong and really disgusting of her uncle to ask her to do that” (15) N=74 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the ”she goes and changes her clothes - because her clothes are too n=3 child will change clothes to bright" (88, 57) look better for the picture "she will change her clothes because maybe she'll look better for the picture'l45) 194 2.2 Response indicates the "she will do it because he said to”(91 , 63) fl child will do the act because "he takes pictures of her body because he said take off her clothes" the adult requested it (83) "it depends on how old she is , if she is 2 or 3 years she might listen to him and take her clothes off and he will take a picture of her” (40) ”if she trusts her uncle she might take them off because she probably trusts him" (39) "she would probably do it and he would take some pictures and show the people” (27) "he will take pictures of her naked - if he told her to take off her clothes and take a picture of her" (18) "I think the little kid will do it because she is supposed to do what he says" (10) 2.3 Response indicates the "she will probably think it is right and she will do it because it is n=7 child will do the act because it her uncle" (84) was requested by her uncle "she will take off her clothes - it is her uncle and he wants to take pictures of her” (72, 66, 59) ”Mary's uncle will help her change clothes - he wants to change her clothes cause he is her uncle" (58) "she will probably take her clothes off because she respected her uncle" (23) "she may take her clothes off and get the picture taken - she might be yougand just think it is OK cause it is her uncle" (O9) N=18 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates "it depends on the people. I don't know them" (99) n=9 inability to project what will ”I don't know" (97, 87, 70, 68, 60, 44, 37, 36) happen next in story 3.2 Response indicates equal ”either she will take her clothes off or not - because he said to or n=2 probability for consent or she wouldn't listen to him” (04) nonconsent from the child ”she might do it or refuse - either she is modest and doesn't want to or she will do whatever he says"129) =11 195 Categorization of Subject Resgses to Questions #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "tell her to keep her clothes on and tell her uncle to take pictures n=32 child should not remove of something else " (39, 20, 56) clothes for the picture "tell him no" (36, 03, 82, 71, 62, 59, 42) ”not take off clothes" (33, 63, 61, 54, 52, 44. 43) "not do it, you don't have to expose yourself if you don't want to" (29) ”say no in a firm voice and say she wouldn't like it" (25) "believe in her instincts - say no. sorry I can't do it” (22) ”put her clothes back on and say she didn't want her picture taken like that" (21) "tell him she doesn't want to do it” (10, O9, 97) "tell uncle I want to keep by shirt on" (102) ”tell him no, ask him why does she have to take off clothes" (98) "tell Uncle Joe to try it out by himself" (90) ”tell him no the clothes are OK - tell him to take a picture of something else" (83) ”tell him to leave me alone and keep my clothes on" (73) "scream for help" (69) ”say no, and even if he begged me I wouldn't because I wouldn't want to be naked in a picture" (53) ”say no and keep watching TV" (48) 1.2 Response indicates the ”tell Uncle Joe that I will change into other clothes and then you n=14 child should not remove can take pictures - tell him if he was my uncle that I didn't want clothes for the picture, but to take pictures without my clothes” (40) should change clothes for the ”tell her just go change to some darker clothes - I wouldn't do it, picture just change my clothes" (35) "I'd ask him why he wanted me to take off my clothes, I could just change my clothes in my room, you are just testing your camera, so why should it matter if I have bright clothes?" (30, 0‘7) ”tell him no and ask him if he wanted me to go to my bedroom and change my clothes, with him standing there, when I wouldn't take off my clothes in front of him" (14) ”say no - I wouldn't never want to do it, he should ask her to put on different clothes" (96) "change clothes to something that shows up - say no thank you, I don't want my picture taken” (92, 57) ”say no, I'll go and change my shirt and come back down” (91, 68, 50) ”go into the room and change into other clothes - say I'll wait for mom and dad to come home” (85) "say no thank you cause I can do it by myself, but she may say you can help me, but she might cause he is her uncle, but she shouldn't" (58) ”change her clothes, because she'll look better for the picture" (45) 1.3 Response indicates the "say no - take the picture with her clothes on” (37,13) n=2 child should not remove clothes for the picture. and have picture taken with same clothes on 196 1.4 Response indicates the "not let him and let him take pictures of something else - I would n=5 child should refuse to just keep watching TV and ignore him" (32) participate and ignore the "keep watching TV and don't take clothes off " (ZS, 84, 72) adult "just sit there - because she should ignore him and watch TV" (88) 1.5 Response indicates the "say no thank you, I would probably tell him off - if he was n=l child should refuse, and take snoozing, I would take out the film and cut it up" (08) Egressive action 1.6 Response indicates the ”try to say I‘m too tired to get up or something, make an excuse” n=l child should make up an (49) excuse not to participate N=55 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "don't take clothes off - go upstairs and don't watch TV anymore" n=9 child should refuse to (31, 41) participate and leave the "leave, or go to a phone if she doesn't have a way to leave, she situation could use a phone - I would try to leave” (17) ”not take off the clothes - don't go by him again" (80) "scream and um" (75) "say no and go up to my room" (74) "I wouldn't do it and try to get away” (64) "go upstairs and lock the door” (60) ”say no, I don't want to take off my clothes, I just want to watch TV - if he still tried, I would walk away and do something else” (16) 2.2 Response indicates the "if she plans on staying with the family, do it, and say nothing, n=2 child should refuse, react with an aggressive act, and leave or refuse it - I would beat the hell out of him and leave, but I know that isn't the smartest answer, but that is me” (99) "run away and lock the door to a room, if he tried to get me I would probably kick and stuff and bite” (79) N=11 197 Category 3: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates the "go to a neighbor's house and call 911” (34) n=20 child should refuse, leave, and "tell her parents. say no, and go to her room” (28) tell "say no, if he was trying to do something to her, just walk away from him, just go to another house or neighbor or call someone” (27) ”tell him no and walk out of the room and go to her room and when her parents come home, tell them what Uncle Joe was trying to do" (15. O6, 02) "say I'll go upstairs and take them off and pretend to go to room and call emergency number" (101) "say just a minute and go in her bedroom and lock the door until her parents get home - go out the window and go to my friends house and tell my friend” (12) ”say no and go call somebody" (11) "tell her mom and dad - say no and Ieave"(03) "say no, run out of the house, and go to a friends house and tell a friend" (103) ”tell her t go upstairs and lock self in parent's room - tell her parents" (94) ”go to a phone and call a neighbor” (93) ”avoid him and call my parents” (95) "say no - call my parents or maybe go over a friend's house that I know well and ask them to play or go inside” (81) ”call her mom and dad - rim out of the house and go to a different house” (78) ”walk away, tell him not to and when parents get home tell them - walk out of the house and tell a friend's adult" (77. 46) "leave - my parents would probably leave the number with Uncle Joe, so call parents” (70) ”walk away, say no and call her parents - go to my room and call my parents" (51) 3.2 Response indicates the "say you have to take the picture with my clothes on - if he said n=1 child should request to have no I would run and then tell someone” (100) picture taken with clothes on, if refused, then leave and tell N=21 198 Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and ((1) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, tell, and continue to tell if merbd N=0 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) 5.1 Response indicates the "say no and tell another adult about it” (38, 67) n=12 child should refuse to ”put her clothes on and tell her mom and dad” (26) participate, and tell ”say no , I am not going to take my clothes off and immediately call my parents” (18) ”say no, I don't want to take off my clothes and go see if my parents left a phone number where they will be" (05) "I wouldn't take my clothes off for the picture and would tell my parents when they got home" (04, 01, 86) "ask her mom to leave the number so she could call her mom - I'd tell my mom when she gets home and hide the camera” (76) ”say no. I am busy now Uncle Joe in a polite way - tell my mom and dad he told me to take off all my clothes” (66) ”say no, and maybe tell her mom when they got back - call 911" (65) "I think she should call the police and tell them that she was sexually abused - I would say I can change into different clothes” (47) 5.2 Response indicates the "tell her to ask him why and just refuse it, call for help if her tried n=1 child should refuse, and it do it - say no” (55) requesthelpifhe triestodoit after her refusal to participate N=13 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell a Trusted Adult , Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the “go tell authorities, bust Uncle Joe and go to jail and prison for l n=l child should tell. and react life - tell and go after the person that made me do it and beat him with ive behavior up" (19) ] N=l Category 7: Response included: (a) Leave Sub-Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) 7.1 | n=0 199 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) [8.1 Response indicates the "do it cause you can see yourself in the picture when it comes n=l child should follow request out” (89) from adult [ N=1 Category 9: Response included: (a) Not Sure How to Respond f Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the ”don't talk to him - I don't know what to do " (87) l n=1 l child is not sure how to respond L I N=l | Category 1(1 Response included: (a) Response indicates the child needs more information to determine response , Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID #) | 10.1 n=0 N=O 2(1) Vignette: #2- Neighbor Bribing with Cookies (Potentially Abusive) Categorization of Subiect Responses to Qttestions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child knows it is not right for the adult to make that request of the child "he will say no thanks and say he is late for school or has a lot of homework and tell his mom - he seems like a kid that knows right from wrong and he knows that it is wrong” (02) "I would walk out and go home and tell mom - because your not supposed to do that"(103) "first I wouldn't go in the house without permission - my mom told me not to"(102) "he says no and walks away - it is not right for him to do that”(100. 99) "he said I don't think so, look at his face - I would get in trouble"(90) ”don't go upstairs" (91) " he might not help her - because he might not think it is right" (09) "he says no thank you - because he probably doesn't want to go upstairs and see her change clothes and thinks something is wrong”(51) "I don't think Jose' should help her with her clothes - it is not good" (64) "it was wrong - because if she was married she could have her husband help her" (70) "he shouldn't help or eat the cookies - cause you shouldn't do that”('76) "he will say no - cause if she wanted help putting on her clothes that is weird” (25) ”Jose' will feel bad and he will not go there anymore - cause he helped her get dressed and he shouldn't have” (26) "I think he will not go - because it is not right to change someone's clothes X35) n=15 1.2 Response indicates the child knows the situation is not right because they identify the need to notify parents/authority "he should get someone else if he is walking home from school, he should be near his house and tell his dad or mom 0r whoever is home - because it is not a normal thing to do”(17) "he says no because it is against the law” (69) "he runs to his house to talk with his mom - because he knows better” ('74) "he might go and tell his mom - cause the old lady wanted him to help her get dressed” (34) 1.3 Response indicates the child indicates it is not right but makes some compromise for the cookies "he probably say I'll just wait here - because he may want a chocolate chip cookie” (57) n=1 201 1.4 Response indicates the child will not want to do the action requested by the adult "I don't think he would want to and I don't think he would - because it is kind of weird that this mom or old lady is asking him to help her get dressed" (07) "he shouldn't do it , just tell her to try not to bump her arm when she is getting dressed and he had to go home - because he probably didn't want to help her get dressed" (29) "he will probably say no and if your arm is hurt you should go see a doctor - cause probably Jose' don't want to do that” (14) "he would go home and get some cookies - cause he probably doesn't want to help her get dressed" (20) "he might say that is OK I will have my mom make me cookies at home - because she said her arm is hurting and she needed help getting dressed and he wouldn't want to do that"(50) "he doesn't help -cause he doesn't want to help her get undressed” (75) 1.5 Response indicates the child would not feel comfortable following the request by the adult ”that is wrong - because he feels tmcomfortable"(93) "I don't know, he will probably feel uncomfortable and not want to do it and say no - cause it was just for cookies"(49) n=2 1.6 Response indicates the request from the adult involves a coercive tactic "she is trying to bribe him to go upstairs and he wouldn't because he might have learned about that and feel tmcomfortable and not go - she is trying to bribe him and said she hurt her arm, he doesn't feel right and doesn't know if he should"(06) "I think that Mrs. Jones arm is not really hurt and she just wants him to go upstairs — I don't know” (40) "Jose' will not go to her room - cause I think unless there was something really obvious. like a cast you would know she was fooling him to get him upstairs”(15) "he will probably take it not real serious and nothing will happen and she will get dressed in front of him or something - cause she is bribing him with cookies and it is just something people wouldn't ask a child to do"(21) "he will say no and go home - because she is tricking him" (56) ”she will start doing some bad things to him and he will keep it a secret because she said she would give him a cookie" ('72) "he might go and do it if she really hurt her arm, but she probably didn't - because he would say no thank you and walk away" (33) n=7 1.7 Response indicates it would not be smart for the child to follow the request of the adult ”he may not want cookies that bad and his mom may have some and he could make some - he looks smart from the picture and he may not want cookies that bad” (05) ”he will probably go up - cause he is a little boy and doesn't tmderstand"(l9) n=2 1.8 Response indicates the adult is sick for making that request of a child "he wouldn't, say no way that's gross - it would be sick and you know she would do something bad”(46) n=1 202 1.9 Response indicates it would not be safe for the child to follow the request of the adult "he didn't do it - because it is not safe” (73) "she will probably abuse him next - she will just do that” (31) "she will do something bad - either leave or say no”(104. 95) ”she might not let him have the cookies — because he might am away because he thinks she would do something like hurt him"(94) ”that he goes upstairs and when she tries to kidnap him he might run downstairs out the door and away - because she might kidnap him”(79) "he doesn't go up and just walks away - because she might do something to him" (23) "she molests him - because she wants him to take off her clothes"(83) "she might abuse or molest him - getting help dressing wouldn't she get someone older, whey did she ask a little boy"( 12) ”I think if he is smart he will say no thanks, if not he will go upstairs to help her get undressed and she will probably rape him - because she could probably get dressed on her own even with her hurt arm and she shouldn't ask a little kid” (16) ”not sure, I think Jose' will go in and then start running out and call the police cause that is sexual abuse" (47) "she might rape him or something" (48) "she will drug him or she will put something in the cookies, something will happen - because no one would ask you to come upstairs and help get dressed" (60) )she might hurt him - because it isn't right”(62) n=14 1.10 Response indicates the child should not follow the request from the adult because the adult is the opposite gender of the child ”I don't think he will - because she is a girl and he is a boy” (03) "maybe he wouldn't because she is a woman and probably he would go home and tell her he doesn't want cookies anymore” (‘77) "maybe he will say no because it is weird for a boy to put on an old lady's clothes - cause it is sort of weird" (42) ”he might say if the neighbor had a husband to call his work to help her and if not married go get my mom another female to help her - because he thinks it might be wrong he is a boy and she is not the same sex. she might try to pull something over on him" (55) 1.11 Response indicates it is not right for the adult to request that of a child because there is a power/age difference in the relationship ”maybe he will not really help her but pick out an outfit and ask her to get dressed herself - because that is not right to do that because she is older than him and he is just a kid"(01) ”I think it is against the law to have a little kid go into someone's house and help a grown up change clothes - he knows her well but a stranger wouldn't do it" (101) "he will say no you can do it without me - because it will not be right for a kid to help a grown up to change in that situation”(96) "he doesn't do it - because he knows someone else like a grown up should help her" (86) "he sees her body but he shouldn't see that - because she is a girl and he is a boy and she is a grown up and he is a child" (66) "he will say you should get someone else to change your clothes cause I am not the appropriate person - because he is young and she is old and to help her change clothes would be wrong, if it was his mom it would be different"(28) 1.12 Response indicates it is not right because the act would infringe on the child's rights for privacy/self- ection ”she might tell him to take off his clothes - cause she wanted to see him" (52) n=1 203 1.13 Response indicates it is "he goes home and tells his mom - you shouldn't go into n=5 not right for the child to someone's house that you don't know even if she is a neighbor” follow the request from the (78) adult because the child doesn't "I don't think he would help her - he might be afraid because he know the adult doesn't know her well and she might do something to him" (81) "he shouldn't be there if he didn't know her that well, some neighbors I know well and I go over there, but I don't think he would ever do that, I would know if it was right or wrong” (84) "I will say no thank you and walk away - because if she can do it but can't change her clothes, it seems weird she is a stranger, he doesn't know her very well and he may not feel comfortable" (13) ”while he was walking up there he tells his mom - because he may not know her that well "(67) N=68 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the ”he likes chocolate chip cookies so he says yes" (98) n=16 child will do the act for the "he gets cookies and eats them all - because he didn't have cookies anything to eat" (80) "he might help her get dressed - because chocolate chip cookies are his favorite”(82,92) ”he will probably get cookies - because he helped her get dressed” (87.89) "he'll take off her clothes and change them - well she asked him and he likes cooldes" (18) "he is going to help her and get the cookies - cause he wants the cookies" (53) "he is going to help her dress- because chocolate chip cookies are his favorite” (54. 59. 65, 30, 39) "maybe he will obey her - because he really likes chocolate chip cookies and he knows he could get some afterwards" (61) "he went inside and he helped her and then got some cooln'es - he will go home next" (63) "I think he will help her get dressed - because chocolate chip cookies are his favorite and he might not know the right thing to d0"(38) 2.2 Response indicates the "she will ask Jose' to help her unzip her dress - cause she wants n=1 child will do the act because him to do something for her, just help her change her clothes and the adult requested it make her bed"(58) 2.3 Response indicates the ”he helps her - because she hurt herself" (97) n=3 child will do the act because "he would probably help her and she would thank him - because the neighbor said she was hurt she hurt her arm and she could go to work”(85) "he will probably go up and help her - because she said her arm was hurt and she couldn't do it herself " (10) 2.4 Response indicates he "he will probably do it - because it is his neighbor“ (37) n=1 will do it because it is a :1de making the request N=21 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub—Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 7 3.1 Response indicates "I don'tknow"(11, 68, 88, 45, 71, 27, 36) n=9 inability to project what will ”I'm not sure - she is an old lady and I'm not sure if he should go” happen next in story (43) ”maybe he would help her get dressed - I'm not sure” (44) 204 3.2 Response indicates equal probability for consent or nonconsent from the child ”either he will help her or he will not help her - it is his decision if he should help or not" (04) "I don't know, I might day either I would like the cookies sol can go home, or would do it , whatever he is feeling up to at that moment - it depends on his common sense"(08) "he might or might not - she might be lonely and needs help and can't do it and she might not need help with her clothes "(22) "maybe he will help her change clothes and maybe not - cause a daughter or granddaughter can help"(41) "he could do it and get a cookie or he wouldn't do it and he probably knows she is faking- he would probably do it for a cookie and not do it because he doesn't want to be in that kind of position" (32) N: 14 205 Categorization of Subiect's Responses to Questions #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child should refuse to participate ”I think he should say I will ask my mom to bake some cookies but thanks for asking anyway - I would say that I don't want cookies cause my mom had some at home"(01) "say no thanks I will get cookies later”(22) "tell him to say no I don't want to"(25) ”say forget about it I can get my own cookies”(27) "not help her, not get the cookies and not even go in the house to get the cookies"(43) "I don't think he should, it is not good for guys to help her get dresses - just say no"(44) "he shouldn't help her even though she hurt her arm because maybe she might be faking - I would say I can get my own cookies"(45) "I wouldn't go upstairs even if her arm was hurt, I wouldn't help her"(48) "I'd tell him to say it was not right of her”(52) "if I were him I wouldn't cause what if she threatens him in her bedroom even if those cookies were his favorite "(61) "say no I don't want cookies because she probably really didn't hurt her arm"(68) n=1] 1.2 Response indicates the child should refuse to help her undress but wait for her to finish or help in another way "he should just stay downstairs"(36) "he should say I'll wait outside - I would wait outside and when she needed clothes she could describe them and I could go get them instead of going into her room she could wait in the bathroom, so I could go in the room and get her clothes"(47) "say no, can I just have a cookie right here and watch TV ”(96) ”if he wants cookies go home first and then come back because he might get in trouble with out permission. say I will wait her tmtil you are done ”(102) 1.3 Response indicates the child should make up an excuse not to participate "I think he should make up an excuse that I have a lot of homework to do or basketball practice tonight so can I have the cookie and go home"(08) n=1 1.4 Response indicates the child should not have gone in the house "he shouldn't have gone in the house in the first place, it is not safe"(59, 62, 63, 66) "say no - I wouldn't have gone in the house at all ”(71) ”don't go inside”(79) ”not go in the house because she is a stranger and she may want to kill him"(80) n=7 1.5 Response indicates the child should refuse and react ‘ with a ssion "call heranoldhag and kick herreal hard, I have bustedmy knuckle if someone messes with me I would hit them”(99) n=1 N=24 206 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the ”tell her no thanks and just go home — I wouldn't go into her n=24 child should refuse to house "(09) participate andleave the ”say I have to go home and I don't want to do it - that is a bad idea situation and leave and say bye Mrs.. Jones"(90) ”tell her she should have a grown up help her - just walk home”(86) ”say no and leave”(1 1, 26,49, 69, 82, 83. 104) "just say no and I'd tell my mom to bake me cookies - I wouldn't go up in her room and just walk home"(13) "tell her no - tell her no, I have to go home and do schoolwork"(14) "I would just leave and just tell her you really didn't want food, cause if she is a nice person and your parents are friends with her you might not want to say something bad, just you are not hungry-”(17) ”tell her no thanks and just go home”(21) "tell her I don't want the cookies - tell her I would never do anything like that and my mom is expecting me home and I have an appointment and go"(28) ”just say no thank you and if he wants cookies that bad have his mom bake him some or get some from the store - I'd just go on home"(35, 57) "tell him not to no matter how much he wants the cookies, it is not good to help others with those things , they are not in your family - I'd say no thank you and walk away”(38) ”say no thank you because I wouldn't take the cookies if she offered them, but not do that - I'd just say no, but I would ask if I could have a cookie if I didn't do that and if not just go horne"(42) "just say I don't have the time and I have to go home" (56) ”say no thank you - pretend I didn't hear it and go home"(65) ”say I don't want anymore cookies and go home and say I will have my own cookies"(77) ”just go home and say I can't help you I have to take care of my little sister”(81) "say sorry I can't and make up a reason to Ieave"(101) 2.2 Response indicates the "say no thanks I think I have to go - I would help her to call n=2 child should refuse, and leave someone else to help her and go home"(41) yet offer some type of other "I'd tell him to go home and ask his parents or he call her relatives assistance because she doesn't have to ask a little boy to come and dress her and she is a lady she could have a sister come over - well I'd ask does she have any relatives and I would call them for her , but I wouldn't go upstairs and help her change clothes "(30) N=26 207 Category 3: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates the child should refuse, leave, and tell "he shouldn't have gone into the house in the first place and he 11:8 should leave and tell his mom - say no thanks, I have to go home and tell my mom” (02) "he should say I can't I'll have my mom come with me when I get cookies later, and say I have to go someplace and leave - say I couldn't cause I had to go back home do something for my mom and walk out"(06) ”say no I don't want to help you get dressed, I don't want your cookies, if I have to help you undress, because they could be poisoned and I am going home to tell my mom"(16) "go get some help, refuse the offer and go get help”(55) ”say he is sorry he can't help and has to go home and when he gets home tell his mother what happened - I wouldn't even though she was a neighbor, it would be nice if I could but I wouldn't"(64) "say I can't I have to do homework and I am expected home now - say good-bye and walk out and tell my parents if she did that before”(84) ”say no he doesn't want cookies because he doesn't have to do something to get cookies, she lied to him, he should go home and tell his mother or adult, go home and say no thank you”(92) ”say no, leave and tell his parents what happened”(98) 3.2 Response indicates the child should refuse, leave, tell and try to find help for her ”say no thank you, go away and tell his mom or dad what i=3 happened, they can see if she needs help in the morning and his mom could go over and help her"(05) ”say no thank you and just go home and ask my mom if I can come back "(60) "he should ask his mom and tell her to help"(9'7) =11 Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and (d) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave. tell, and continue to tell if methd - N=0 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) 5.1 Response indicates the "he shouldn't help her and tell his parents and have someone come n=1 child should refuse to over to help her - say no, tell my parents and have them go over participate, and tell to help her" (04) I N=l 1____l 208 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the "go home and tell his mom” (03, 15, 34, 50, 103) n=l6 child should leave and tell "he should go home and tell his mom or dad - get out of there, I wouldn't go in there unless I knew her very well ”(12) "get out of the house - I wouldn't change her clothes, I would get out of the house and tell my parents" (18, 40) ”run out of the house and go back home and tell his mom - get out and start running to the first person I could find"(46) "go home and ask his mom or dad if he can go over and help”(54) "leave and tell his mom or an adult or whoever is watching me"(67) ”you should go tell an adult - I wouldn't go into her house"(72) "he should run and tell his mom and call the police"(‘74) ”just go ask someone else to do it - just go ask my mom"(75) ”I wouldn't do it, go home and see if his parents would come with him”(91) ”go out of the house and go tell his parents cause it is not right"(95) N=16 Category 7: Response includes: (a) Leave Sub—Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) 7.1 Response indicates the "probably just go home"( 10) n=14 child should leave ”go home"(20, 78, 88, 94) "just walk away" (23) "tell her I have to go home and be careful with her arm"(29) ”walk out"(31, 93) "tell him to walk away and walk to the school with his class”(32) "leave"(70, 73) "I wouldn't help just run out the door and saygpod-bye"(76, 100) 7.2 Response indicates the "say I have to be back, I have lessons”(51) n=2 child should make up an "say I forgot and I have a violin lesson and if she said to come excuse to leave back for your cookies I wouldn't go back "(58) N=16 209 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) 8.1 Response indicates the "take the cookies and leave"( 19) n=5 child should follow request "I'd tell him to say to the neighbor. see how bad it is - I would from adult say how did you hurt your arm and help her and go home "(37) "tell him to help Mrs. Jones - I would help her"(39) "I think he should help her and then not cause it is not appropriate but she really needs help - if she had a relative I would call them and stay with her until they came"(85) "tell his mom that the lady go t hurt - call my mom, yes I would help her change clothes because if I knew who it was I would help"(89) N: Category 9: Response included: (a) Not sure how to respond , Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the "I don't know what I would do”(87) | n=1 child is not sure how to respond I | I N=l Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates that the child would need more information to determine response Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID#) 10.1 Response indicates "I think he should just say I got to get home, if he really didn't n=3 action is dependent on like her or know her, if he thought she was strange, say he had to familiarity of the adult, gender get home, I don't think he would want to help her - I thought if it of the adult, or desire for was my mom or her friend I would go help her but if it was a guy prornisedreward I wouldn't help him get dressed”(07) "I'd tell him not to because she really didn't hurt her arm - if I was a girl I might, but if I was a boy I wouldn't”(33) "l"ell him if you want the cookies go ahead and do it - if it was something I really wanted I would do it, if it was something I didn't want I wouldn't do it"(53) N=3 210 Vignette: #3- Stranger in Van (Potentially Abusive) Categorizatig of Subiect Responses to Questions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child should not follow the request from the adult "she should not go"(33) ”I don't think she will go"(44) "say no and walk away - keep going” (51) ”she will stay away"(87) ”if I was the little girl, say my parents have a code and if she didn't know it walk away - because if she didn't know it you know your mom didn't tell her to pick you up"(104) n=5 1.2 Response indicates the child is too young to know the situation may be harmful "probably she would go with the lady cause she is young, about 8, she wouldn't know what to do - she is too young and the lady seems pretty convincing to her maybe”( 13) "the girl looks young so she might get into the van - because she is young and younger kids they are starting to learn what kidnapping is but she may do it"(08) ”she will go - she is a little kid and don't understand"(19) "she might go in the van depending on how old and smart she is - if she is smaller kid she might go in and bigger she might have learned the rule not to go with strangers”(39) "she would go with her - because she is not old and wouldn't know better"(59) ”she'll walk away - depends on her age if little she might go and if she is 10 she might Ieave"(93) 1.3 Response indicates the request from the adult involves a coercive tactic "I don't think her mom is really sick, I think she is just saying that to kidnap her and if she doesn't know her, her mom would probably not send her to get her”(07) "I wouldn't do it - it could be a trick"( 100) "I wouldn't go in because she would be sick in the morning if in the hospital and I wouldn't believe her"(77) "I think Latisha will not go in the van because most people would know that the person in the van is lying - she would know the lady was not telling the truth cause she never saw her before"(15) "she might run home and see of her mom is there - because she doesn't believe the woman"(34) "she could be lying cause people do that”(56, 63) "walk home and see if my mom was really sick” (42) ”she didn't do it cause she didn't believe her - kept walking and told her mom"(50) ”say no and keep walking - because she may be lying to her”(67, 88. 97) ”it might be a stranger - she might lie”(70, 75) "she asks if there is a code word from the parents or ask them for a code - because they could just be kidnapping them and lying ”(85) "I can't do this you are lying and I can't talk with strangers, strangers are bad"(90) n=16 211 1.4 Response indicates it would not be smart for the child to follow the request of the adult "the little girl might say no or yes or just walk home - because if she was smart she will not go with the lady and if she believes the women she might get in"(05) "if she is smart she would not get in the car cause her mom taught her not to, if she gets in no one will see her again - because what else is a total stranger going to do, a lot of kids get in cars for candy and no one sees them again"(l6) "if she was smart she would say no thank you and just walk home - because she doesn't trust her and she is a stranger" (32) "she will not go cause she is probably a kidnapper, I would go home and if my mom is not there call my aunt or someone - because she is probably a kidnapper"(35) "if she is mart she will say no and walk to her house and find out and her father might tell her - if she doesn't know the right thing she may get in the car"(38) "she should tell the lady she is full of shit who would do it - if she is smart leaves, if not get screwed up and find her in a ditch somewhere" (99) 1.5 Response indicates it would not be safe for the child to follow the request of the adult ”she would get in there and never see her parents again - the lady might take her away and she never had kids and wants to"(06) "I would talk with her and ask her, what is the doctor?, and who are you?, and if someone was going by say excuse me this woman is trying to kidnap me"(101) "the lady will ask her to get in the car and Latisha will say no and the lady will drive up and grab her - because it looks like she is a kidnapper"(95) "go home - so she doesn't get hurt"(54, 96) "walk away - because she could grab her" (62) "she probably kidnaps her - because she trying to convince her to kidnap her"(7 1) "a tall stranger kidnaps her — because she is a criminal "(94) "she might hurt her - because you shouldn't get in a car with someone you don't know, and she is lying"(48) "the lady might pick her up and take her somewhere else and kidnap her - cause maybe she is a stranger"( 14, 40, 43, 52) "she will kidnap her - cause she doesn't know her and she is in a van”(2 1) "she will get in the van and she will turn around and kidnap her - she would get in the van to see her mother”(26) "she will probably take her somewhere else and kidnap her - because she is mean"(27) "kidnap her and hold her for ransom - because you could get money ”(3 1) "she will go and the woman will kidnap her (47, 83) "she would say I will walk to the hospital - because maybe she will drive up to her house and tie her up and kidnap her"(57) ”she will kidnap her and take her away and sell her”(60) ”she doesn't go, rims and sees if her mom is home, if not goes to a friend's house - because if picks her up she might do something bad to her"(76) "stay away she could pull you in" (84) n=23 212 1.6 Response indicates it is not right for the child to follow the request from the adult because the child doesn't know the adult "she will say if she needs a ride she will ask her dad to take her - cause in the first grade you learn not to talk to strangers and not to get in the car with a stranger"(Ol) "just keep walking home - because her mom probably told her not to get in a car with a stranger"(92) "say no and scream for help - because she doesn't know the PCYSOII"(69) "she will turn down the ride and walk home and see if mom is sick, she'll tell her mom if she is sick she can call her grandmother or grandfather or relative to take her to the hospital - she doesn't know the person and never saw her before in her life"(02, 81) "say no and walk away - if her parents told her she wouldn't go with the stranger she would do that"(04) "she might walk away - because she is a stranger and she never saw her before”(09, 10, 17, 20, 45, 64, 66, 74, 78, 80, 86, 98) "say no my mom wouldn't ask you to pick me up - because she never known her before” (65) "she will get in the van which she shouldn't the woman will kidnap her - because she doesn't know the person and usually that is what they do to little kids"( 18) "the girl might call for help because she doesn't know her or the girl might ask for proof - cause she doesn't know her and think she might be an abuser and the lady might feel like the girl is nervous and tell her the mom wants her to go with her"(22) "she wouldn't ride with her - because it might be a stranger and she might take her somewhere”(23, 73) "she'll say no and walk away - if she doesn't know the lady she is a stranger and she might try to pick her up and kidnap her"(25, 55) "she will say I will ask my dad or someone at home and I will walk home - because she never should go with a stranger"(28, 29, 30) "maybe she will go and maybe she went home - because the lady she didn't know and if her mother is sick she knows someone like grandparents or aunt or uncle can ask those people"(41) "she would start running and yelling for help - cause she wouldn't know who it was or what she would do"(46) "she is not going to take her to the hospital but to her house - because usually when you know somebody they, you know they will not tell a lie, unless you only met them for a week ago, but if you know them for a month and you trust them, you can get on. but Latisha doesn't know her"(58) "rim away and yell - because she was a stranger and her mom probably would tell her and her mom can't get that sick that quickly"(79, 82) "she should walk away - because she doesn't know the woman and she could be lying if she knew her well she could trust her"(102) "the girl runs away - you shouldn't talk to someone you don't know, my mom says don't talk to people you don't know, but how are you going to make friends?"(103) N=91 213 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "she might go - because she wants to see her mom"(36) n=7 child will do the act requested "she might go with her"(37) by the adult "she will go with her because she would believe her”(49, 72) "she might because she thinks her mom wants her to - cause if her mom was really sick she would want to be with her" (53) "she is going to the hospital to see if her mom is OK - because she loves her mom"(89) "she will get in - because her mom told her to get a ride over"(91) N=7 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates "I don't know what she would do"(03) n=3 inability to project what will "I don't know” (11, 68) happen next in story 3.2 Response indicates equal "she could get in the car but I wouldn't - she looks confused and n=2 probability for consent or doesn't know what to do"(12) nonconsent from the child "there are two possible answers, she says no thank you or she believes her and gets in the van" (61) N=5 Categorization of Subject Responses to Questions #4 ajnd #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "not go"(44, 80) n=12 child should refuse to "not ride in the van"(45, 56, 57, 63) participate "don't follow a woman you never seen before, she might kill her"(6l) "scream for help"(62) "say no my mom is at home and not sick"(67) "it is a stranger and I wouldn't"(87) "say your just tricking me to get on”(96) "say no and tryto get the license plate"(101) 1.2 Response indicates the ”say my mom never told me about you and wheat is your name n=1 child should make up an excuse not to participate and stuff - say I have to check at my house to get a book sol don't get bored there"(58) =13 214 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "just tell her I don't know you and my mom was fine this n=12 child should refuse to morning - tell her I never saw her before and I don't know her and participate and leave the I would walk away"(09) situation "run away and say no in a firm voice — I wouldn't go by the van and say no and run away in the house"(18) "say no and go home "(76, 102) "say no and Ieave"(25. 51, 75, 82) "tell her not to ride with a stranger - say no and walk away if they drove up I‘d run to the nearest house"(Z‘D "leave and walk home - say I never saw you before and walk home"(28) "not get in the van because you don't know the person - tell them to go to a friend's house"(33) "don't listen to her she could kidnap you -justgo home"(52) 2.2 Response indicates the "say no and walk away or ignore her - my parents have a n=1 child should try to determine password, I would ask if they knew it , I wouldn't go with if the person is telling the them"(04) truth, if not, say no and leave N=l3 215 Category 3: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates the child should ref use, leave, and tell "go tell her dad that a lady did that and ask dad ifit is true - say no thanks because I can ask another relative that I know to do it” (01) "turn down the ride and go home and tell her parents - say not thanks and walk away"(02, 83) "say I should go home and if her mom is not there just call the hospital - say no and walk home and if not there call dad"(05, 53) "say I'll go home and I'll call my mom or let my dad take me"(07) "say I have to go home and call my daddy to make sure he knows - keep walking and say have a nice day"(08) "say I am going home now and then call her mom at the hospital - before the car approached me I would see what she had to say then I would leave "(12) "tell her no thanks and keep walking home and call her mom or if her dad is home talk to him - tell them I don't want to unless I know the person, I would just go home"(14) "say no I never saw you before and doesn't mention your name, so I would just keep walking - say no I don't know you good-bye and I would walk home and I think you are lying and I will go home and check it"(16) "say I will go home and see what is happening and get a ride from someone else" (21 , 81) "tell her not to get in the van and go to the teacher or someone she knows and ask what to do”(38) "say no because I don't know you, go away and go borne if no one is there call somebody you know and ask if mom is sick"(41) ”you shouldn't get in the car and when you get home find out if your mom is really sick and then go to a friend's house and stay there"(64) "say no, walk away and walk home and make sure she doesn't follow her and check the hospital and call the hogrital" (95) n=16 N=16 Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and (d) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the "say no, walk away and tell a grown-up - say no, walk away and n=1 child should refuse, leave, tell an adult that will believe me "(06) tell, and continue to tell if meded N=1 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) 5.1 Response indicates the I n=0 J child should refuse to participate, and tell L I N=0 I 216 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the ”go home and tell my dad"(20) n=19 child should leave and tell "go home and tell my mom what happened"(37, 90) "go home and check the neighbor and see if my mom was there and ask if she was sick and ask the friend for a ride to the hospital "(29) "walk home and just forget about it - I'd go home if dad was home ask if mom was in the hospital, I would trust my mom"(32) "rim to someone's house and tell them about it , if it was my mom's friend stay there to be safe"(40) "run to school or home which ever is closer and tell the teacher”(103) "find the nearest person and tell them what happened"(46) "she shouldn't do it - I wouldn't say anything and just keep walking and when I got home I would tell my mom"(50) ”call my dad and mm home or rim somewhere and hide"(60) "scream for help and run and go see mom and dad"(69) "run away and tell an adult"(72, 74, 91) "go home or to a neighbor and tell a grandparent"(84) "walk away and scream for help"(78) "go see if her mom is there or go to her house - I wouldn't go with her because she might be lying, start running in the house and lock the door and hide"(89) . "walk away and then go home e and then to a neighbors"(93) "run awaLand call her mom"(94) 6.2 Response indicates the "go away and if the van follows her find an adult or a policeman n=1 child should leave and tell if and tell "(15) the van follows her N=20 Category 7: Response includes: (a) Leave Sub-Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) 7.1 Response indicates the ”go home anyway - go home, I never saw her before I would never n=29 child should leave believe her"((B) "back away from her”(97) "walk off and not go with her"(59) "just walk home"(10, 13, 35) "run home"(34, 66, 77) "walk away”(l 1, 19, 26, 39, 43, 65, 73) "walk away from the van so the person can't grab me- if the person got out of the van I would run to the nearest house"(l7) "leave and go to a trusting place"(3 1) "walk home and make sure my mom is OK"(36, 54) "she would be lying so keep on walking"(68) "rtm"(70, 88) ”run and scream"(71, 79, 86, 98, 100) "tell her she is full of shit and go into the nearest store or gas station and not someone's house "(99) N=29 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request , Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) 8.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should follow request from adult IN=0 217 Category 9: Response included: (a) Not sure how to respond Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the n=0 child is not sure how to respmd I N=0 Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates that the child would need more information to determine response Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID#) 10. 1 Response indicates child's response is dependent on another factor which needs to be determined "ask to see a not that tells her I can go with her and if she doesn't I wouldn't go if she did I would go"(22, 23) "tell her I would go home and see if my; mom left a note and then get in the van, no I wouldn't get in the van I would check her out, she could be just anyone pulling up telling her her mom is sick"(30) "say I am going home to see if my mom is really sick, then you can take me there"(42) "say could you wait if my mom wasn't home say I could walk - say if she is my mom's friend check my mom's phone book to see if you are there, my mom says don't go with strangers"(47) "I wouldn't get in the car - say no and start running home and see if she was sick, if she was ask her what her name was and where she lived to see if she was telling the truth"(48) "walk away- or might quiz the lady to see what she knew about my mom"(49) "if she had a code word and her parents sat down and they would tell her the code word and go with her - I would ask for my mom's name and dad's name and strange questions like my dogs name and if she made it up she is a stranger"(55) "ask for a code word for proof , if she didn't know it not go with her"(85, 104) "say if mom wants you to pick me up go get a note from her and pick me up at my house - say leave me alone and walk away"(92) n=11 N=11 218 Vignette: #4- Stranger Attempting to Assist Boy in the Bathroom (Potentially Abusive) Categorization of Subject Responses to Questions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categori es of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "he went to get in the car with his mom-because his mom was in n=5 child should not follow the the car waiting for him”(89) request from the adult "he goes out and gets his mom-not let the man help him"(91) "then maybe he goes back shopping with his mom"(96) "he goes to the bathroom-because he has to go to the bathroom"(97) "he leaves the bathroom"(99) 1.2 Response indicates it is "he should call for his mom or go back out-no one else can do n=1 not right for the child to that without permission and he should know it is wrong"(17) follow the request from the adult 1.3 Response indicates the "the boy will say no thanks I learned to do it myself - I think it n=26 child would not follow the would be uncomfortable for him cause he knows to go by request by the adult because himself"(01) the child doesn't need the help "Troy will say no, I can do it myself -he can use the bathroom from the adult himself" (02, 03, 04, 05, 08, 20, 22. 25. 29. 47, 51, 53, 55, 64. 71, 72, 74, 76, 81, 83, 84, 98, 101. 103) "say no he could do it by himself and if he needed help he could ask his mom-probably because he wants to do it by himself and everyone probably wants to help him”(32) 1.4 Response indicates the "I think he shouldn't let the guy help him and he should come n=2 request from the adult back out to his mom-because he is a total stranger and he is involves a coercive tactic probably lying about having a child in a wheelchair"(18) "say I don't want help-because I can't talk to strangers, they are bad and he was lyirg"(07) 1.5 Response indicates it "he will say I know what to do, leave me alone-because he is a n=1 would not be smart for the smart kid"(19) child to follow the request of theadult 219 1.6 Response indicates it would not be safe for the child to follow the request of the athrlt "he probably wants to abuse him"(104) "he should do it by himself -because id he doesn't he might get in trouble"(77) "he says no I don't really need help and the man tries to get him"(79) "I think the boy gets hurt or something-because he let a stranger see himself and help him with his body"(66) "the man would carry the boy away- because it wouldn't be hard for the man to take him out of there"(65) "he is probably going to hurt the boy and tie him up—because he is a stranger"(57) "he is going to ride away-so he doesn't get hurt or kidnapped"(54, 56) "he might abuse him-because he is probably the only two in there and no one will hear him "(48) "he might try to tell him no and tell him to get out and he may not leave-because he might think he was trying to look at him"(52) "I‘roy will say no I can do it myself -because the guy might try to hurt him in some way" (06, 100) "the guy might do something to him I don't know-because he wouldn't tell him he needed help the boy would ask if he needed it” (07) "he'll tell him that he can do it by himself -because he doesn't want him that close to him"(lO) "the kid will just go to the bathroom himself because he knows how-because the kid will think he will do something he doesn't want him to do"(13) "the guy will take him in there and harass him or something-I don't know, maybe he needs help but the man may help him but he may do something else”(14) "the little kid is probably going to be raped or sexually molested- because why would you have someone you don't know help you go to the bathroom when he can go by himself"(16) "he will try to hurt Troy-because Troy doesn't want help and the man said that he would help him"(21) "probably hurt him "(3 1) "if he tries to help him he might touch him in wrong places so he should go by himself"(40) "maybe he will let him help and maybe not-because he already knows how and maybe the man will get him and he will yell for help and call his mom"(41) "say no and then go in and lock the door-he would know the man could be dangerous "(46) "probably kidnap him-I don't know, just a guess"(60) "he may have locked him in there-he may be a total stranger(94) "I would do it by myself -he could do something bad and be a bad person"(95) n=25 220 1.7 Response indicates it is "he will tell the man no, I can do it myself -he knows how to do it n=22 not right for the child to and doesn't need help and he doesn't even know the guy"(12) follow the request from the "Troy might tell him he knows how to do it by himself —because adult because the child doesn't he can and might not want a stranger helping him"(09, 61) know the adult ""he will want to go by himself -the adult is a stranger and he wouldn't want a stranger helping him go to the bathroom"( 15, 35, 44, 45, 50, 62, 67, 73, 78. 82, 88, 92) "he will say no thank you, if he has been in a wheelchair his whole life he can go himself-because he is a stranger and he doesn't want to take his clothes off in front of him”(28) "tell his mom-because the stranger was going to help him"(34) "say no, he can do it himself -because he is not a part of the family, it is not right for others to help unless they really really know you, your parents should say it is OK for them to help"(38) "I wouldn't let him help me cause I already know how and he is a stranger and that could be embarrassing"(42) "the boy might try to avoid him but I don't think he will be able to because he is in a wheelchair-because he felt uncomfortable with someone he doesn't know helping him in the bathroom"(49) 'I‘roy will refuse - because he doesn't know the guy and he might be somebody bad"(58) "he says he can do it by himself-because it is not his dad"(69) N=82 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "the guy will help him-because the boy doesn't have control over n=10 child will do the act requested it"(23) by the adult "the guy will stay in there and watch him-in case he falls and can't get uv"(26) "he will let him help him — because he might not know how to do it by himself"(33) "he went to the bathroom-because he had to"(36) "he may listen to the man—because it doesn't say if he knows how to go by himself in a wheelchair"(39) "he will probably help him- because he needs help"(43) "I think the man will help him go to the bathroom-because I think the man was not lying"(63) "the guy helps him-because he has a broken leg"(75) "maybe he will help-because the boy doesn't know how to walk"(80) "he probably goes with the man-because he is in a wheelchair and the man is probably tryipg to do something"(93L 2.2 Response indicates the "the boy said I can do fine myself and the man walked away- n=2 adult was just trying to be because the man probably thought he needed help but he helpful didn't"(30) "the man helps him-because it is the proper thingto do"(86) N=12 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 , Responses (Student ID #) inability to project what will "not sure"(27) 3.1 Response indicates "I don't know” (1 l, 68, 70, 87) I n=5 I happen next in story 221 3.2 Response indicates equal "he might tell his mom-to make sure it is OK"(37) n=4 probability for consent or "maybe he would walk off and maybe he would let him help"(59) nonconsent from the child "he would let him help and say OK or let him do it by himself and say no thank you"(85) ”well if he is real comfortable doing it by himself-say no thank you and if he couldn't do it he could ask the man for help"(102) N=9 Categorization of Subiect Responses for mestions #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Catgories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "go in and do it by himself -say no thank you"(03, 63, 64) n=68 child should refuse to "say no thanks I already know how to go to the bathroom in a participate wheelchair-l know how so I wouldn't have him help me"(04) "say no I know how to do it alone, and do it myself"(05, 08, 09, 10,11, l3, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 28, 29. 32. 33, 35, 36. 37. 38. 40, 41, 45, 49, 50, 51, 65, 68, 70, 71. 73, 74, 77, 81. 82, 83. 85, 86, 89, 93, 96, 97, 98, 100, 102, 103) "say no"(25, 42, 47, 59, 62, 87) "tell the guy to get out"(26) "tell him I don't need any help-just go the bathroom and not even recognize him"(3 1) "go by himself-just pass the man without talking to him"(39) "I would say I am very capable of it, I would refuse your offer but thanks for helping"(55) "I don't need help"(56, 94) "say no but if he tries to touch me yell-I would tell him I can do it myself "(58) "say no and ignore him"(61) "he shouldn't let him-if he came after me and put his hand across my mouth I would bite him"(79) "say I can go myself and go to the bathroom cause the guy was just lying and could rape you and take you somewhere"(84) "say I can do it myself-ask him to leave cause I have to go to the bathroom bad"(90) "say no thanks he can do it by himself-say leave me alone or I will scream"(92) N=68 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "say no, go in alone and lock the door-I would say no, walk away n=7 child should refuse to and go back when he Ieaves"(06) participate andleave the "say no I can do it myself and I have to go now, and if he locks situation him in he should scream-I would just say no I can do it myself"(07) "say no and leave"(43, 104) "say I don't have to go and leave"(48) "he should get out himself -say no and get out"(52) "say I can do it myself -say I've been in a wheelchair a long time and ride of 1"(66) N: 222 Category 3: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates the child should ref use, leave, and tell "tell the guy no and back out and tell his mom "( 17) 11:8 "go back to his mom and if he really needed help he should ask his mom to help him-don't let him and go back to my mom"(l8) "say no thank you I can go myself -get out and tell my parentstzn "tell him to ask his mom if he needs help-call my mom and tell her to come in and help me if I needed it"(30) "he should go to his mom or go by himself -I would probably go by myself "(44) "say no because he is a stranger-ask your mom or something"(75) "yell for his mom-tell the man to get out and go out and get my mom"(76) "leave or say I can do it myself and leave and tell his mom"(lOl) 3.2 Response indicates the child should refuse, leave after "go by himself and then go tell his mom-say no thank you I can n=3 do it by myself "(01) he has gone to the bathroom, "say no I can do it myself and wheel himself and lock the door of and then tell the stall—go back outside and tell my mom about it"(57) "just go to the bathroom and then go tell his mom"(72) 3.3 Response indicates the "say no I can manage by myself and if he doesn't leave him alone n=1 child should say no and if he he should go outside and talk with his mother about it"(12) is not left alone then leave and tell N=12 Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and (d) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the 3: child should refuse, leave, tell, and continue to tell if meded N: Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) 5.1 Response indicates the "he should say no thanks I can do it myself and go to the n=2 child should refuse to bathroom-say no thanks, go to the bathroom and tell my mom participate, go to the about it"(02) bathroom himself and then "don't listen to him-I would call my mom or dad"(69) tell N=2 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell _ Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the "go outside the door and tell his mom"(46, 54, 78, 91, 95) 1 n=6 child should leave and tell "go tell my mom "(67) IN=6 223 Category 7: Response includes: (a) Leave Sub—Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) 7.1 Response indicates the "run or wheel his way out of there-I would leave he was probably- n=7 child should leave a gay man"(19) "get out of the bathroom"(23, 34, 60, 99) "don't talk with strangers-leave in my wheelchair"(80) "igrgre him and just go-run away"(88) N=7 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) [8.1 Response indicates the l n=0 child should follow request from adult L | N=O Category 9: Response included: (a) Not sure how to respond Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the n=0 child is not sure how to I respond I I N=0 Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates that the child would need more information to determine response Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID#) 10.1 Response indicates "not let him because he doesn't know him then he might do n=1 child's response is dependent something bad to him and hurt him, if you need help let him-tell onanother factor which needs him no cause I know how "(53) tobedetermined 224 Vignette: #S-Teacher Praising Student (Potentially Abusive) Categorization of Subiect Responses to Questions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child should tell the teacher to stop "she will keep going on doing it-because no one said anything to her to stop" (17) "one student will say I don't like that-because they might think they are touclln/g in a way that is inappropriate" (01) n=2 1.2 Response indicates the child would not feel comfortable with the adult doing that action "maybe the kid felt uncomfortable how she put her hand on the shoulder and said please don't touch me-because some people feel uncomfortable about touching" (28) "someone probably said don't touch me-because some people feel uncomfortable" (66) "maybe they will feel uncomfortable-I don't know" (64) "I don't know-tell her parents the teacher touched her shoulder, but it is not that bad cause teachers usually do that when they are proud" (58) "she might make Patty feel uncomfortable-because going arotmd touching shoulders may make them feel bad" (06) "she may pat her somewhere she doesn't want her to-she shouldn't touch them unless they want to be touched" (95) 1.3 Response indicates the request from the adult involves a coercive tactic and/or the behavior is leading to a more lmrmful behavior "the teacher asks her to stay after class to talk about the math grade-she should tell her she has plans after school so the teacher will not do something to her like touch her in the wrong places" (93, 77) "she might do something different to Patty, something not good- because the teacher was trying to take advantage of the kid" (48) "she will get one doing her hand on every shoulder and I'm sure she will on with the lesson for the day-well people don't like to do stuff when there are other people around, even if they are kids, because she knows at least one of them is smart enough to resist or tell someone-she wouldn't try anything cause someone would walk in or tell someone, some lo'ds could be smart enough to resist" (12) "then she starts to bother her-because some people are like that and may strip her clothes off" (96) N=13 225 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub—Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates there "I don't think there was anything wrong with the teacher just n=34 is nothing wrong with the patting them on the back, she was just proud of them" (40. 38, action of the adult 76, 07, 05, 104) "the teacher will say you had a good grade-it is polite to tap you when you get a good grade" (32) "the kid may say thank you for the compliment-because the teacher just patted her on the back and said good job" (29) "I'm not sure, it is not a bad situation" (27) "say thank you-because she was congratulating them" (26, 25, 73, 51, 50, 41, 03, 102, 84) "say thank you she was being nice" (19) "she says good job-because they did well on math test" (74, 72, 71, 57, 22) "she will congratulate them-I don't know " (53) "they'll feel very comfortable and do even better-because they are having support from the teacher" (47) "she will just give them back the tests and the teacher will leave and teach the class- because that is a friendly touch" (18, 16, 15) "she will show them their test and teach them something else- because they did such a good job she owes them a pat on the back” ( 14) "take back the test and the teacher will give out the rest-because she was doing that to everyone and it seems normal" (13, 08) "she will just put her hand on Patty's shoulder and give her the test-that is what she was doing with all the children" (04) "she does the same thing to the next person-because they did good" (100) 226 2.2 Response indicates the adult will continue teaching and the class will continue as usual "maybe she picks up their papers and checks them-because after their test she has to see if they are right or wrong" (39) "she will say you did a wonderful job-she is proud of them (37, 35, 85) "they may get their tests back-they just got their results" (36, 33, 09, 101, 103, 98, 92) "they will get a sticker-because they did good work" (80) "they might get a party-because they all did good on the math test" (34, 30, 55, 54, 43) "she will probably teach the class, that is what you do in school" (31, 02) "she got most right, I mean wrong-because she was nervous" (69) "she gets an A+ on the test and goes swimming-because her mom wanted her to get an A" (67) "she started to do math-because it was math class" (65, 52) "she got her test back-because she got a good grade" (63, 97, 87) "say you did a good job and start teaching-cause they got a good grade" (46) ”the other girl gets a bad grade" (94) "she goes to the next person —because she got 100" (91) ”she just walks to another person and tells them they did a good job-because she is proud of her students" ('79) "she says I love you a lot -because she is good" (90) "the students are working on their homework -because the teacher told them" (89) "she got butterflies in her stomach-she was nervous getting her math test back" (88) "the other girl might feel sad she didn't do a good job"(06) "she tells her thank you-because it is the polite word" (86) "say thank you and go over the test-because they are probably interested in the test" (81) 2.3 Response indicates ‘ nothing will happen next "nothing" (62, 56, 49, 99) "nothirweally, they did a good job" (42, 83) N=76 1 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 3.1 Response indicates inabil' ity to project what will happen next in story Responses (Student ID #) "I don't know" (23, 75, 70, 61, 60, 59, 45, 44, 21, 20, 11, 10, 82) "I couldn't guess" (68) n=14 | N=l4 227 Categorization of Subiect Responses for Questiong #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "if Patty felt that the teacher patted her on the back then I guess it n=10 child should tell the teacher to is up to her if she doesn't feel comfortable, if she was not stop if the behavior creates comfortable, she could just shake her hand-if I felt comfortable I discomfort would do nothing" (40) "if she felt uncomfortable, then she should say I don't like you touching and I feel uncomfortable-say I don't like it and please don't do it" (28, 12, 01) "she should say please don't touch me, I don't feel comfortable" (06, 101, 96) "sit down and do regular work, if she doesn't like it just tell the teacher to stop" (05, 100) "if uncomfortable, say don't pat me on the back that hard" (102) 1.2 Response indicates the "say will you please not touch me" (74) n=1 child should refuse to participate 1.3 Response indicates the "Patty should just ignore it and if she doesn't go away say may I n=1 child should ignore the finish my test it is disturbing-I would just say I like the support behavior and if it doesn't stop but no touching now" (47) then refuse 1.4 Response indicates the "nothing, it isn't like anyone is doing anything and if she has a n=1 child should refuse if problem turn around and deck the bitch, I mean it is kind of my uncomfortable , and take an opinion, it is harder to be polite so I'd rather hit someone than be _aggessive action nice" (99) 1.5 Response indicates the "tell her she has plans after school so the teacher will not do n=1 child should make up an something to her like touch her in wrong places-say I can't stay excuse not to participate in after" (93) further activity with adult N=14 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse, and (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 | n=0 | N=0 Category 3: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult Sub—Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates the "if the teacher was doing that to me I would tell my mom and say n=1 child should refuse, leave, and I don't want you to do that to me and go home" (48) tell 3.2 Response indicates the "say thanks and if she doesn't walk away and tries something else n=1 child should request that the say stop it and if she doesn't just walk away, go to the principal adult stop the behavior , if and tell him about it" (27) refused, then leave and tell N=2 228 Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and (d) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, tell, and continue to tell if merbd N=0 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) g 5.1 Response indicates the "she should say something to the teacher or talk to someone else- [n=1 child should refuse to talk to someone else like a parent" (l7) participate, and tell I N=1 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b)TeIl a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 6 Responses (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the "tell her mom to tell the teacher that she knows she is not an n=2 child should leave and tell abuser, but that she doesn't like people touching her" (66) "I would tell my parents and ask her why she touched me and not the other kids" (58) N=2 Category 7: Response included: (a) Leave Sub-Categories of 7 Responses (Student ID #) 7.1 Response indicates the "she should just go home after school-not even go to school the n=3 child should leave the next day because maybe people didn't like patting on the situation shoulder"('T7) "not sure maybe leave"(64) "walk away and leave the classroom"(95) 229 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub—Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) 8.1 Response indicates the child should feel positive about the teacher's behavior "tell my mom and dad I did a good job on the math test and kids teased me " (78) "be glad-just patting on the shoulder cause she did a good job, I don't think there is anything wrong" (82, 103) "be proud because she did well" (87, 57, 54, 02) "be happy" (89. 60) "say your good Patty" (90) "ask If they could have a party" (34) "say thank you and thank herself for getting a good grade-be proud of myself" (32, 16) "be proud and tell her mom" (67) n=14 8.2 Response indicates the child should accept the teacher's behavior "sit there" (79, 104) "wait for her math papers-just sit there" (88) "look over the test to do better next time" (80) "take the test back" (09, 08) "ask the teacher how well she did" (98) "study harder" (91) "turn in your math test" (39, 52) "put the test in her desk when she gets it " (46) "nothing, unless she felt like something was wrong, that's what you do in school" (31) "she will probably think she got a low grade cause the teacher patted her on t he shoulder like that. she didn't for everyone else- nervous because I thought I got a low grade and she would ask me if I studied" (30) "if she doesn't want to be patted on the shoulder she shouldn't-I would let the teacher pat me on the shoulder" (71, 14) "it was a good touch and there was nothing wrong with it" (70) "think harder" (69) "I would have said OK to her" (68) "don't say anything, it is just a regular situation" (62) "accept what the teacher tells her" (53) "just accept it" (51) "just forgt about it, it is just a friendly touch"(18) n=22 8.3 Response indicates the child should thank the teacher after the behavior "say thank you and look over the test" (81, 38, 37, 56, 49, 15, 13. 94) "nothing-say thank you" (83, 72) "saying good job isn't hurting them-say thank you and take the test" (84) "say thank you and work harder in math" (85) "say thank you" (86, 92, 35, 26, 25, 23, 76, 75, 73, 65, 63, 55. 50, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 22, 21, 20, 19, 11, 03, 97) "say thank you and tell mom and dad I got a good grade" (33) "did she pat all the backs (yes)then just say thank you" (07) n=39 N275 230 Category 9: Response included: (a) Not Sure How to Respond Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the "I don't know" (36, 29, 61, 59. 10) n=6 child is not sure how to "I don't think she has to do anything for the teacher to put the respmd hand on the shoulder, but in other ways it could be different-I am not sure, because either way, I don't know what I should do, I don't know if she is taking advantage of her or if it is the first time" (04) N=6 Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates the child would need more information to respond Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID #) 10.1 n=0 N20 231 Vignette: #6 Doctor Examining Injury (Non-Abusive) Categorization of Subject Responses for Questions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child will not want to do the action requested by the adult "I don't think Mike will want to, he can just pull his pants down to here so he can see the hip-because he doesn't want to take his pants off for the doctor to check his rib or hip, I don't think he should have to"(07) "he just might not do what he is supposed to do-because the doctor doesn't need to do that to see his hip"(48) "the mom will try to get him out of there-because she knows it is not 1i ght for the doctor to ask him to take off his clothes"(49) "I think he would not do it, just pull up a pant leg-because he doesn't want to take off his pants "(96) 1.2 Response indicates the child would not feel comfortable following the request by the adult "he might not do it because he would feel uncomfortable about taking his pants down-he may feel embarrassed in front of the doctor"(06) "the kid might feel nervous cause he would be looking at some parts of his body that he doesn't want anyone to look at-because it is like a part of his body and it is not part of anyone else's"(22) "I think as any kid the boy would be embarrassed and wouldn't feel comfortable-I wasn't when I was in football and had a physical "(32) "maybe he is embarrassed "(64) "I think he is embarrassed-because it is gross"(65) "he probably doesn't feel good about taking off his pants-because it is uncornfortable"(93) 1.3 Response indicates it would not be safe for the child to follow the request of the adult "the doctor will probably do something to Mike-because usually you do not take your pants off you just slide them down"(21) "he might check other things other than his hip-cause he told the boy to take off his pants"(52) "the doctor sees the boy's hip and probably some to his body part- because he told him to take off his pants"(66) "he doesn't take off his pants-because the doctor might do something wrong"(76) "maybe his mom wouldn't like it and she would take him home or to another doctor-because she wouldn't like the doctor touching her son"(77) "they don't do anything to the hip-that they might hurt the hip more"(94) "his mom says no and leaves and finds another doctor-because she doesn't want him to take his pants off"(98) "from this picture something really bad happens or the doctor asks him to come home with him-because the guy looks suspiciousflS) 1.4 Response indicates the child should not follow the request from the adult because the adult is the opposite _ggder of the child "he tells his mom to take him to a different doctor-he doesn't like girls looking at his body"(67) "he lays down and doesn't take off his pants-because he is in front of a girl, his mom"(69) n=2 N=20 232 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "the doctor will look at his hip and see if it is broken or OK- childwill do the act requested because doctors do that"(04. 05, ll. 14, 19, 23, 29, 30, 41, 45, by the adult 50, 71, 72, 74, 78, 80. 83, 84, 91. 92, 97) "just take off his pants so the doctor can look at his hip-the doctor needs to look at it and see what is wrong"(09, 10, 17, 20, 25, 33, 35, 36, 37, 39, 42. 43, 54. 56, 63. 73, 75, 79. 81. 85. 86. 87. 88, 89, 90, 100, 102) "the doctor will examine his hip and he will go home or get some medicine for it -he can't really examine his hip without taking off his pants cause if he hurt not only his hip but his whole leg he needs to get the whole picture"( 13) "Mike will take off his pants and lie on the table-because he knows it is OK for the doctor to look at him without any pants on"(15, 62, 70, 82) "he will do it and take his clothes off -because he is hurt and they know the doctor and how good he is"(18) "he probably did let the doctor look cause it is confidential and he told him what was wrong with his hip—because that is what your supposed to do at the doctor"(28) "he does know the right thing to (lo-because doctors are not part of your family but they know what to do if you are injured, only your family and doctors can see you undressed"(38) "the mom might tell the kid to do what the doctor says cause the doctor is doing something to help him"(40) "Mike should just trust the doctor because he knows what he is doing"(47) "the doctor will look at the injured part and tell his mom if it is broken-because I don't know ”(57) "he might take off his pants-because he trust the doctor to look at it and it might help"(6l) "he lies on the table and does it-because he asks his mom to get the hell out of there"(99) "there is nothing wrong with asking him to take his pants off and not your underwear"( 101) "that is normal-they need to take your pants off to examine"(104) 2.2 Response indicates the child will do the act because the adult requested it "he might take his pants off -because the doctor told him to"(34, 53) "he will probably do it because it is the doctor"(44, 46) "he does it-because the doctor said to and he doesn't think it is wrong"(51) 2.3 Response indicates the child will do the act requested by the adult with the parent present "The kid will do it as long as the mother is in the room with him- because he is just a doctor and just there to look at his hip"(01) "Mike's mom will want to wait outside and he will not let her and they will go on with the procedure-because he would feel uncomfortable in front of the doctor and will want his mom to stay" (02) "he will take off his pants and the doctor will probably examine his hip to see if it is broken-because when doctors tell you to do something you usually do it and if you hurt your hip, it is not like he is going to do anything to you with your mom right there"(l6) "he'll just look at it and probably will not do anything-because his mom is there"(27) "he will ask his mom and she will stay in the room and he would take off his pants if he tried anything she would stay to watch"(55) 233 2.4 Response indicates he "just pull them down half way-because his mom is right there and n=1 will do the act requested by I don't think he would do anything"(08) the adult with a modification I I N=74 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates "I don't know "(03, 31, 58, 59, 60, 68) n=7 inability to project what will "not sure because if I go to the doctor, I don't like getting check happen next in story ups "(103) 3.2 Response indicates equal "I'm not sure, if the mom stays then he will probably examine n=2 probability for consent or him-because he wouldn't do anything to hurt him if the mom was nonconsent from the child there"(l2) "that he'll lay up there and he'll start looking and umm-I don't knofl26) N=9 234 Categorization of Subject Responses to Questions #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "I wouldn't go to the doctor, I have to be really sick, I had a friend n=7 child should refuse to that broke his and it did no good"(99) participate "tell his mom his hip is OK and if not, go home and let his dad check it-say I don't want to go to the doctor unless hurt real bad"(76) "I wouldn't do that at all because I don't like my doctor to say that"(71) "say no"(69) "I don't know, but I still wouldn't though-cause it is for my safety"(61) "tell the doctor he doesn't want him to do that-I would tell him I'm uncomfortable when he does that"(22) "jut tell his mom that he doesn't want to and go to another doctor- tell my mom I didn't feel comfortable"(21) 1.2 Response indicates the "ask the doctor if he can do something else besides take off his n=10 child should ask the adult if pants"(93) he can modify the request "ask can I just pull up a pant leg"(96) "I don't think the boy should take his pants fully off, just down to the waist"(66) "tell him not to do it-probably don't take off everything, leave on my underwear"(Sl , 42) "tell his mom he doesn't want to do that-say no I don't want to do that and ask the doctor for a gown"(48) "let him if I had a little gown thing-wouldn't let him without my mother"(33) "ask if he can just pull down his pants a little, but if he can't do it with his pants on-I would take my pants off"(0'7) "say I'll take my pants down and not my underwear and have his mom stay with him-have my mom stay with me and not do it and have him check it"(06) "say he doesn't want to pull his pants all the way down, but just half way down to see the hip"(O l) 1.3 Response indicates the "just say, go to another doctor and make up an excuse to leave-tell n=1 child should make up an him the same thing, excuse that my hip really doesn't hurt that excuse not to participate much anymore "99) N=18 235 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the child should refuse to participate and leave the situation "go to a different doctor that is the same sex-if a boy doctor ask to go to a girl doctor"(67) n=1 2.2 Response indicates the child should try to determine if the person is telling the truth, if not, say no and leave "ask his mom if he has to do it and ask to leave"(98) n=1 N=2 Category 3: Response included: (a) Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult A Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) _ _ 3.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, and tell I IN=o I Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and ( d) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should ref use, leave, tell, and continue to tell if merbd N=0 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult 7 Sub—Categories of 5 Res nses (Student ID #) 5.1 Response indicates the I n=0 I child should refuse to participatetand tell I l N=0 | Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell 7 Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the I I n: I child should leave and tell I TN= | Category 7: Response includes: (a) Leave , Sub-Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) 7.1 Response indicates the I n: I child should leave 236 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) 8.1 Response indicates the child should follow request from adult "he should listen to the doctor and do it"(104, 102, 100, 91, 89, 88, 87, 86. 84, 82, 80, 79, 78, 77. 74, 70, 65, 64, 63, 59, 56. 54. 46, 45, 44, 41, 39, 38, 37. 35, 30. 29. 28. 26, 25, 23, 20. 18, 15, 12, 11, 10, 09, 05. 04) "just let him measure me"(97) "get an x-ray and see if it is broken"(92, 83, 72) "tell his mom he doesn't like this doctor and get another-do what he says and then walk away "(95) "he should ask the doctor if it will hurt and if he will put needles in it-I would say OK"(94) "don't swing for a month. no a week-I would say don't swing so high and jump off the swing"(90) "some people really trust their doctor and do whatever they tell you-I trust my doctor and I would do what ever he told me and get help"(85) "he should do it because his mom is there and the doctor is experienced with that stuff"(81) "just say it hurt-tum around and look at the mirror"(75) "go home and lay down and don't walk arormd"('73) "I think he should do it cause his mom is there and he would get in trouble-I would do it"(53) "trust the doctor"(47) Do what the doctor tell him-if he did something bad just get up and leave”(31, 27, 13) n=61 8.2 Response indicates the child should follow the request by the adult with certainmodifications "he should do what the doctor says and if he feels uncomfortable he should tell him to stop. when I was younger they asked me to take off my pants, but now that I am older they give me a poncho to put on. it is not very bad, if it is a new doctor. I feel more tmcomfortable"( 101) "have his mother stay in there and make sure the doctor doesn't do anything"(50) "if his mom is with him he could take off his pants"(43, 16) "just do it, the doctor is trying to help-I would ask the doctor is they had a sheet"(40) "I don't know-put on a gown first"(36) "just pull them down so he could see the bruise"(08) "he should let him mom stay just in case"(02) N=69 Category 9: Response included: (a) Not sure how to respond Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the child is not sure how to respond "I don't know-it is OK but it is uncomfortable"(103) "I don't know"(68, 60) "I don't know-ask my mom if I should"(34, 17, 14, 03L n=7 J N=7 237 Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates that the child would need more information to determine response Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID#) 10.1 Response indicates "I am not sure, if he was my doctor] would"(62) n=7 child's response is dependent "ask the doctor if he could talk to his mom and ask her why he onanother factor which needs asked him to take his pants off -tell my mom I am uncomfortable to be determined to take them off "(58) "if he is not comfortable taking off his pants. he should say he doesn't want to -I wouldn't want to take off my pants and show him the injured part"(57) "I would do what the doctor told me. but if he was trying to do anything unusual I would do something about it like tell my mom or tell the secretary"(55) "I don't think he should take it off, I don't know it might be safe and it might not-I wouldn't just take off my pants, id the doctor was real close I could"(52) "if it had to be done and he really hurt his hip bad, I would do it"(32) "do it-if it was bruised bad enough I would, if it wasn't I would not, if I could walk I wouldn't”Q9) N=7 238 Vignette: #7- School Photographer Taking Pictures (Non-Abusive) Categorization of Subject Responses to Questions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "he will not take his coat off -cause his mom told him not to"(67, n=6 child should not follow the 69, 78, 79, 90) request from the adult "say no -because he has a nice suit on"(75) 1.2 Response indicates the "I think he will not-because he doesn't want to take it off"(36) n=1 child will not want to do the action requested by the adult 1.3 Response indicates the "he might or might not-there is nothing wrong with taking off his n=1 child would not feel coat if there is something under it and he might feel comfortable following the uncomfortable and tell him he doesn't like that and wants to stay request by the adult the way it is"(38) 1.4 Response indicates the "the photographer will take the coat and put it in his bag-because n=3 request from the adult he likes the jacket"(57) involves a coercive tactic "maybe he takes it off and never gets it back-because he may forget it or the man may take it"(77) "he takes it off and sits it down-the man steals it for his son"(88) 1.5 Response indicates it "Bobby wouldn't do it because he would think there was n=1 would not be smart for the something wrong-if he was smart and went through the classes child to follow the request of and learned about it he wouldn't do it"(06) the adult 1.6 Response indicates the "the little boy will take off his coat and the guy will ask him to n=2 adult is sick for making that take off the tie or something else-it may not but it may because request of a child the guy may be a sick-o"(05) "then he probably asks him to take off the rest of his clothes- because he is a loser"(101) 1.7 Response indicates it "he will ask him to take off something else-because he is already n=9 would not be safe for the child asking him to take off something"(21, 26) to follow the request of the "then he might say it looks bad and take the tie off and more-cause arkrlt he is kind of mean and stuff"(27) "he might tell him to take off something else and take more off- because maybe the guy is a bad guy"(48) "maybe something bad will happen like take off his coat-because there has to be something wrong in the story"(66) "maybe the photographer does him wrong-because his mom doesn't want him that way"(80) "he is probably scared-because he doesn't want to and doesn't know what the photographer will do next"(93) "he might have something happen to him-because he started asking him to take his jacket off"(95) "then he will ask him to take off all his clothes-it is OK to just take off the coat "(96) 1.8 Response indicates the "he will say his mom wants him to keep it on-that's the way he n=1 child should not follow the got dressed for the picture and that is how he should stay" (01) request from the adult because it is contradictory to parents request 1.9 Response indicates it is "he might ask if he might, I like it with my coat on-because he n=1 not right because the act might like privacy"(104) would infringe on the child's rights for privacy/self- protection 239 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub—Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the child will do the act requested by the adult "he will probably take off his coat and have his picture taken- cause it is not a big deal and maybe it is hot out and is a good idea"(02, 08, 32) "he would probably take it of f -if he had another t-shirt undemeath"(33) "it wouldn't do anything to take his jacket off -either take it off or leave it on"(04) "he will take it off for the picture-so he can have his picture taken"(09, 34, 44, 45, 46. 47, 58, 72. 83, 85. 87, 89. 97. 100. 102) "he takes off his jacket-so his picture will look better"(lO. 11, 13, 15, 16, 20, 23, 25. 28, 29, 37, 39. 50. 52. 53, 54. 55. 56, 61. 65, 73, 76, 82, 84. 86, 91, 92) "he will put his coat down and take the picture-because that is what the photographer does"( 14, 17, 19, 43) "nothing is wrong"(70) "he takes the picture-I don't know”(94) 2.2 Response indicates the child will do the act because the adult requested it "Bobby will do it-because the photographer told him to"(49, 63, 74) "he'll take it of f -because it really is not bad to take it off cause someone older is asking him so it is OK"(SI) "he might do it cause his mom told him to"(62) 2.3 Response indicates it is the child's decision to follow the request from the adult, but no harm is indicated "he would either take off his jacket and take the picture or he would leave his jacket on and take the picture, whatever he wanted to do-because he is just saying to take off the jacket to see the suit, if he was saying take off the shirt it would be different"(07, 42) "he would probably ask him if he could leave it on-cause his mom probably wants the picture like that"(30) "if he likes the overcoat leave it on, if he doesn't take it off"(35) "take it off if he wanted to"(40) "he may want to leave it on-to look better"(98) "if he likes it keep it on, if not take it off-he is not getting Paid"(99) n=7 N=65 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates inability to project what will happen next in story "not sure, he mi ght-he looks confused on what to do just standing there, what should I do"(12) "he will take his coat off -because the guy told him, but I think he shouldn't, but he probably should"(18) "I don't know"(3l, 59, 60, 64, 68, 71, 103) 3.2 Response indicates equal probability for consent or nonconsent from the child "if he is supposed to keep it on he would, if he didn't care, he wouldn't-cause it is his decision"(03) "he might take it off or maybe he will not-cause he likes it for his parents and wants to look good"(22, 81) "maybe he will take it off and maybe he will leave it on'141) N=l3 240 Categorization of Subiect Responses for Questions #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the child should refuse to participate "say no and leave it on"(90, 48) "say I want it on-I would have my picture taken"(88, 16, 10) "keep it on because it is the way your parents want you to wear it in the picture-tell him I want to keep it on"(83, 58, 37) "say that might not be a good idea"(81) "say I want good pictures not ike ones-say my mom wants good ones"(80) "tell him his mom wants it on for the picture"(79, 13) "not take it off and say it is my clothes and I can leave it on"(‘T7) "say I don't want to and I want to leave it on"(60) "he should say I like to keep it on-I would take it off and put it in my bag so he didn't take it"(57) "he should say I like it better with it on"(49, 12, 05. 01) "tell him I am uncomfortable taking it off "(38) "say I prefer to have my jacket on in the picture"(27) "just take the picture -say I want to keep it on"(31, 21) 1.2 Response indicates the child should not follow the request "keep the coat on because the man could be trying to hurt him"(104) "if he really wants it on leave it on-if it was me I would leave it on"(102, 35) "keep it on if he likes it and take it off if he wants to "(99, 61, 32, 29, 23, 07) "leave it on it would look better"(98) "leave it on or take it off and don't do anything else he says"(95, 22) "wear the jacket, I don't know-take the picture and leave"(94) "leave it on and not listen to him"(78, 74, 62, 33, 06) "just leave his coat on because if he wore it he probably wanted it on"(71) "do what his mom says-keep it on"(67, 03) "I wouldn't do it-he might be a killer"(65) "just make up an excuse and say my mom wants me to see it in the picture "(51) "tell him it is his choice"(42) "keep it on, I had the right"(40) "keep it on-because his mom probably wanted it on"(36) "keep his clothes on"(26) n=27 N=50 241 Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "walk away-I would say no"(69) n=1 child should refuse to participate and leave the situation N=l Category 3: Response included: (a) Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, and tell 3.2 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, tell and try to find help for her N=0 Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and (d) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Categories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should ref use, leave, tell, and continue to tell if merbd N=0 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) , 5.1 Response indicates the I n=0 child should refuse to participate, and tell I N=0 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the "I would run off and tell the principal "(101) n=2 child should leave and tell "tell someone or his teacher-I would be too scared and not tell someone, or go to my mom later and or teacher cause my mom would panic too much"(66) N=2 242 Category 7: Response includes: (a) Leave Sub-Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) 7.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should leave 7.2 Response indicates the n=0 child should make up an excuse to leave N=0 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) 8.1 Response indicates the "he should take his coat off"(103. 100, 92, 91, 87, 86, 85, 84, n=41 child should follow request 82, 76, 72, 70, 63, 59. 56, 55, 54, 53, 50, 46, 45, 44, 43. 39. from adult 34, 30, 28, 25, 20, 18, 17, 15, 11. 09, 08, 04, 02) "just take the picture"(97, 89) "say I am just going to take off my coat"(96) "take it off and get his picture taken-are these sexual harassment stories"(19) 8.2 Response indicates the "take off the jacket but if asked to take off more say no"(93) n=3 child should follow the "if the teacher asks him to take off anything else he shouldn't but request by the adult with that is not bad"(52) certainmodifications "listen to him-but if I didn't have anything under it .he mttst have something under it"(47) N=44 Category 9: Response included: (a) Not sure how to respond Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the "keep his jacket on because it goes with his suit-just take it n=3 child is not sure how to off“(75) resprnd "take off his coat-keep it on cause I don't know who that guy i8"(73) "I am not sure-I don't know if the photographer wants to hurt me or if he just wants the picture to look good"(64) N=3 Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates that the child would need more inf orrnation to determine response Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID#) 10.1 Response indicates "if he really wanted to wear it say no"(68) n=3 child's response is dependent "I don't know it depends I think what kind of suit I was wearing if onanother factor which needs it was nice I would take it off"(41) to bedetermined "if he is uncomfortable taking it off, don't take it off-keep it on"(l4) N=3 243 Vignette: #8- Man Holding Door Open at the Mall (Non-Abusive) Categorization of Subject Responses for Questions #2 and #3 Category 1: Response Indicated Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates that the action by the adult may be followed by a potentially harmful action "he follows them, he probably looks at them and maybe he likes them-or he is just being nice"(101) "he may bother them-he may slam the door on them"(96) "the guy might follow them-because he might like them or be a mean person "(95) "the man probably shuts the door and locks it-because it depends whether he is nice or not, you can sometimes tell if he is"(93) "they shouldn't talk with a stranger and should get help-because they would be told by parents not to talk to strangers"(80) "maybe they would ask the man who he was-because they don't know him and afraid he might take them"(77) "a person might take them-because you should have an adult when your at the mall"(76) "they buy themselves stuff and he tries to get it-because the guy is trying to be nice to them"(75) "they by skis-watch out for the other people"(68) "they talk to another grown up-because they think he will do something"(67) "probably start talking to them more-because he was nice"(66) "the man will follow them in the store-because he likes her and he is just curious"(57) "if they said good afternoon back he would probably keep following them-she can't just trust anyone"(40) "probably follows them in-I don't know because he likes them"(36) "he might follow them all over the place-because he is mean"(27) "he will follow them around-to see where they go"(26) "they will go into the mall-I don't know just keep on going until he follows therfllO) n=17 1.2 Response indicates the request from the adult involves a coercive tactic "he wants to ask them out"(104) n=1 N=18 244 Category 2: Response Did Not Indicate Potential Harm Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the "they would thank him for opening the door for them-because it n=52 behavior by the adult is a was a polite thing to do"(102, 100, 99, 98, 97, 82, 84, 90, 81, polite gestureanddoesn't 78, 79, 72, 74, 65, 62, 61, 60, 58, 56, 55. 54. 51, 50, 48, 47, indicateharm 46. 44. 43, 42, 41. 39, 38.37, 32, 30, 29, 28. 25. 20. 19. 18. 15. 14, 13, 09, 08, 05. 04, 03, 01) "he works there-because he said good afternoon and he was wearing a tie"(69) "he will follow them around and help them with things-they don't know him and he is openingthe door and talking to them"(21) 2.2 Response indicates they "they will go inside the mall-this is what they were going to do in n=26 children will continue the first place"(l7, 91, 92, 83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 70, 73, 63, 52, uninterruptedbytheadults 34,31, 16, 11.02) behavior "walk in-because he opened the door"(103, 71, 33) "he might be the owner of the store and he comes in-because he has to run the cash register"(94) "they will go in the store-because the picture looks that way"(53) "they will walk in-because the man was just the manager or someone"(35) "he will probably wait on them or something-because that is something that people do"(23) "they will say thank you and keep walking-because they don't look like they are stopping to have a meaningful conversation"(12) 2.3 Response indicates the "nothing really, he might follow them or talk to get to know n=2 adult may continue with them-because he might think they are sexy and want to be their friendly behavior friend"(22) "he will go up to them in the store and ask them questions- because he thinks they need help"(06) N=80 Category 3: Response Indicated Inability to Project What will Happen in the Story Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) 3.1 Response indicates "I don't know"(59, O7) n=4 inability to project what will "they will walk into the mall-I don't know "(49) happen next in story "not sure"(45) 3.2 Response indicates equal "he may be just helping them or maybe not-he may ask them to n=1 probability for harm and no go to his house"(64) harm to the children N=5 245 Categorization of Subiect Responses for Questions #4 and #5 Category 1: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate Sub-Categories of 1 Responses (Student ID #) 1.1 Response indicates the "don't do it, walk in another way-say thanks and bye "(104) n=1 child should avoid adult's behavior 1.2 Response indicates the "walk in and ignore him and don't talk with him"(28, 23, 06) n=3 child should ignore the adult's behavior 1.3 Response indicates the "open the door by myself "(96) n=5 child should not accept the "yell for help-I don't know "(77) adult's behavior "just stay in the store until they leave-ask someone to take me out"(75) "watch out for other people"(68) "don't talk with him-because he is a stranger"(87) N=9 g Category 2: Response included (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place Sub-Categories of 2 Responses (Student ID #) 2.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse to participate and leave the situation N=0 Category 3: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, and (c) Tell a Trusted Adult , Sub-Categories of 3 Responses (Student ID #) y 3.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, and tell I | N=0 I Category 4: Response included: (a)Ref use to Participate, (b) Leave the Situation and go to a Safe Place, (c) Tell a Trusted Adult, and ((1) Continue to Tell Trusted Adults Until Someone Believes the Event Happened Sub-Cattgories of 4 Responses (Student ID #) 4.1 Response indicates the n=0 child should refuse, leave, tell, and continue to tell if tended N=0 Category 5: Response included: (a) Refuse to Participate, and (b)Tell a Trusted Adult Sub-Categories of 5 Responses (Student ID #) child should refuse to 5.1 Response indicates the I n=0 I participate, and tell IN=0 I 246 Category 6: Response included: (a) Leave, and (b) Tell Sub-Categories of 6 Response (Student ID #) 6.1 Response indicates the "yell for help-scream and run away "(80) n=6 child should leave and tell "go call their mom to come and get them "(76) "talk to their mom-talk to a grown up"(67) "if the man started following them go to the counter and tell someone was following them "(40) "go call their mother and tell her"(36) "tell somebody "(26) N=6 Category 7: Response includes: (a) Leave Sub-Categories of 7 Response (Student ID #) , 7.1 Response indicates the "turn around and walk away or say thank you"(95) n=3 child should leave "tell them to go somewhere else"(93) I "ignore him-quickly get my stuff and go out of the store"(57) l N=3 Category 8: Response included: (a) Follow the Adult's Request Sub-Categories of 8 Response (Student ID #) 8.1 Response indicates the "say thank you for holding the door-normal] y I don't go to the n=74 child should accept the adult mall by myself so feel uncomfortable"( 101) behavior "thank the man and walk away"(64, 66, 100) "just go in and shop"(59, 103, 91, 82, 83, 88, 89, 72, 73, 63, 62, 61, 48, 35, 31, 05) "say good afternoon"(45, 07, 84, 78, 50, 47, 43, 08) "say thank you and go in"(102, 98, 97, 92, 85, 86. 81, 79, 69, 71, 65, 60, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51. 46. 44. 42, 41, 39, 38. 37, 34, 33. 32, 30, 29, 25, 21, 20. 19. 18, 16. 15, 14, 13, 11. 09, 04. 03. 02) "I would just walk in or if cute llirt"(99) "don't mind he is just being kind"(70) "nominees 8.2 Response indicates the "watch their backs but go in and make it look like smiling n=4 child should accept the adult's back"(49) behavior with certain "say thank you and go in fast because she can't talk with strangers modifications only say thank you"(90, 58) "just say hi and walk in without stoppirg"(74) N: Category 9: Response included: (a) Not sure how to respond Sub-Categories of 9 Response (Student ID #) 9.1 Response indicates the "I don't know"(94) child is not sure how to respmd | N=l 247 Category 10: Response included: (a) Response indicates that the child would need more inf orrnation to determine response Sub-Categories of 10 Response (Student ID#) 10.1 Response indicates "if he was following her all over I would tell someone near-I n=6 child's response is dependent wouldn't do anything unless he was following me, I would tell onanother factor which needs someone”(27, 10, 17, 12) tobedetermined "if he is really nice, try to be nice too, if he says he wants to be friends and get cof f ee, say we just have to go shopping-I wouldn't talk and say hi and just go"(22) "I think she should stay close with her friend and don't get separated-smile back and would keep close to my friend and make sure he is not following me"(01L N=6 248 REFERENCES Ames, T. (1991). Guidelines for providing sexuality-related services to severely and profoundly retarded individuals: The challenge for the nineteen-nineties. Sexualig and Disability, 2(2), 113-122. Ammerman, R., & Hersen, M. (Eds). (1990). Children at risk: An emon of factors contributing to child abuse and neglect. New York: Plenum Press. Ammerman, R. (1992). Sexually abused children with multiple disabilities: Each is unique, as are their needs. National Resource Center on Child Sexual Abuse of the NM Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1(4), 13-14. Bagley, C. (1990). Development of a measure of unwanted sexual contact in childhood, for use in community mental health surveys. Psychologic_al_ Reigns, 66, 401-402. Bagley, C. (1990). Validity of a short measure of child sexual abuse for use in adult mental health surveys. Psychological Reports, 66, 449-450. Bagley, C. (1990). Is the prevalence of child sexual abuse decreasing? Evidence from a random sample of 750 young adult women. Psychological Reporg, 66, 1037- 1038. Bagley, C., & Genuis, M. (1991). Psychology of computer use: XX. Sexual abuse recalled: Evaluation of a computerized questionnaire in a population of young adult males. PercepM and Motor Skills, 12;, 287-288. Baladerian, N. (1991). Sexual abuse of people with developmental disabilities. Sexuality a_nd Disability. 2(4), 323-335. Baladerian, N. (1992). RAPPORT model aids victims with developmental disabilities.- National Resource Center on Child Sexual Abuse of the NaMZenter on Child Abuse and Neglec_t, _l_(4), 8-9. Benedict, M., White, R., Wulff, L., & Hall, B. (1990). Reported maltreatment in children with multiple disabilities. Child Abuse and Neglect, fl, 207-217. 249 Berrick, J. (1988). Parental involvement in child abuse prevention training: What do they learn?. Child Abuse and Neglect, l_?:, 543-553. Berrick, J., & Barth, R. (1992). Child sexual abuse prevention: Research review and recommendations. Social Work Research & Abstracts, 2_8_ (4), 6-15. Berrick, J., & Gilbert, N. (1991). With the best intentions: The child sexual abuse prevention movement. New York: Guilford. Beutler, L., & Hill, C. (1992). Process and outcome research in the treatment of adult victims of childhood sexual abuse: Methodological Issues. Joumgl of ConMg an_d Clinical Psychology, 6_0(2), 204-212. Borko, N. (1992). Education is key to successful prosecution. National Resortrce Center on Child Sexual Abuse of the National Center on Child Abuse mtg Neglect, 1(4), 6, 12. Briere, J. (1992). Methodological issues in the study of sexual abuse effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60(2), 196-203. Sullivan. S, Brookhouser, P., Scanlan, J., Knutson, J., & Schulte, L. (1991). Patterns of physical and sexual abuse of communicatively handicapped children. Ann Otol Rhinol Lgygol, 100, 188-194. Caldwell, R., Bogat, G., & Davidson W. (1988). The assessment of child abuse potential and the prevention of child abuse and neglect: A policy analysis. American Journal of Communig Psychology, l_6_(5), 609-623. Caliso, J., & Milner, J. (1992). Childhood history of abuse and child abuse screening. C_h_ild Abuse aynd Neglect, _l_g, 647-659. Chantler, L., Pelco, L., & Mertin, P. (1993). The psychological evaluation of child sexual abuse using the Louisville Behavior Checklist and Human Figure Drawing. _C_hil_d_ Abuse and Neglect, _l_‘Z, 271-279. 250 Cohen, R. (1992). Reestablishing trust, communication goals for deaf and hearing impaired children. National Resource Center on Child Sexual Abuse ofihe Nationg Center on Child Abuse and mlect, 1(4), 11. Cohen, S., & Warren, R. (1990). The intersection of disability and child abuse in England and the United States. Child Welfare, 6_9(3), 253-262. Cole, P., & Putnam, F. (1992). Effect of incest on self and social functioning: A developmental psychopathology perspective. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 99(2), 174-184. Cole, S. (1991). Preface to the special issue on sexual exploitation of persons with disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 2(3), 179-183. Crossmaker, M. (1991). Behind locked doors: Institutional sexual abuse. Sexualig and Disabilig, 2(3), 201-219. Crossmaker, M. (1986). Empowerment: A systemsgpprwch to preventing assaults against people with mental retardation and/or developmental disabilideg Columbus, Ohio: National Assault Prevention Center. Crossmaker, M. (1988). Increasingsafety for people receiving mental health services. Columbus, Ohio: National Assault Prevention Center. Dempster, H., & Roberts, J. (1991). Child sexual abuse research: A methodological quagmire. Qflld Abuse and Neglfiect, 15, 593-595. de Young, M. (1986). A conceptual model for judging the truthfulness of a young child's allegation of sexual abuse. American Journal of Orthopsychiady, 56(4), 550-559. Doueck, H., Bronson, D., & Levine, M. (1992). Evaluating risk assessment implementation in child protection: Issues for consideration. Child Abuse and _NggLedt, l_6_, 637-646. Elvik, S., Berkowitx, C., Nicholas, E., Lipman, J., & Inkelis, S. (1990). Sexual abuse in the developmentally disabled: Dilemmas of diagnosis. Child Abuse and Neglect, 14, 497-502. 251 England, L, & Thompson, C. (1988). Counseling child sexual abuse victims: Myths and realities. Journal of Counseling and Development, Q, 370-373. Feinstein, R., & Plutchik, R. (1990). Violence and suicide risk assessment in the psychiatric emergency room. Comprehensive Psychigtfl, _3_1 (4), 337-343. Feldman, W., Feldman, E., Goodman, J., McGrath, P., Pless, R., Corsini, L., & Bennett, S. (1991). Is childhood sexual abuse really increasing in prevalence? An analysis of the evidence. Pediatrics 28(1), 27-33. " Finkelhor, 1)., Asdigian, N., & Dziuba-Leatherman, J. (1993). Victimization Prevention Training in Action: A National Survey of Children's Experiences Coping with Actual Threats and Assaults. _Fimily Research Laboratory: University of New Hampshire. 1-18. Finkelhor, D., & Strapko, N. (1992). Sexual abuse prevention education: A review of evaluations studies. In D J. Willis, E. W. Holden, & M. Rosenberg (eds.), Prevention of c_h_iLi_rr1altreatment: Developmental £19. ecological grsatives. (pp. 150-167). New Yorlc Wiley. -- Finkelhor, D. (1990). Early and long-term effects of child sexual abuse: An update. Professionaj Psychology: Reseatch and Practice, 21(5), 325-330. Finkelhor, D., & Baron, L. (1986). Risk factors for child sexual abuse. Journal of Intetmrsonal Violence, 1(1), 43-71. Finkelhor, D., & Browne, A. (1985). The traumatic impact of child sexual abuse: A conceptualization. Americap Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 25(4), 530-540. Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G., Lewis, 1., & Smith, C. (1990). Sexual abuse in a national survey of adult men and women: Prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors. 911131 Abuse and Neglect, 1_4, 19-28. Fitz-Gerald, A., & Fitz-Gerald, D. (1987). Parent's involvement in the sex education of t heir children. Volg Review, Q6), 96-109. 252 Flango, V. (1991). Can central registries improve substantiation rates in child abuse and neglect cases? Child Abuse and Neglect, g, 403-413. Fryer, G., Kraizer, S., & Miyoshi, T. (1987). Measuring actual reduction of risk to child _ abuse: A new approach. Child Abuse and Negleg 11, 173-179. Fryer, G., Kraizer, S., & Miyoshi, T. (1987). Measuring children's retention of skills to resist stranger abduction: Use of the simulation technique. Child Abuse a_pd m, u, 181-185. Garwick, G. (1993). What can we learn from the Glen Ridge Case?. Contemmry Sexuality, 4—6. Goetz & Le Compte (1984) Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research Goldsmith, H. (1990). Men who abuse their spouses: An approach to assessing f utme risk. 9mg; Treatment of the Criminal Of fendeL 45-56. Goleman, D. (October 6, 1993). Abuse-Prevention Efforts Aid Children, The New Yorlt firm, p. C13. Greenwald, E., Leitenberg, H., Cado, S., & Tarran, M. (1990). Childhood sexual abuse: Long-term effects on psychological sexual functioning in a nonclinical and nonstudent sample of adult women. Child Abusefld Npglgt, 1_4, 503-513. Griffiths, D., Quinsey, V., & Hingsburger, D. (1989). Changingindppropriate sexual behavior". A communig-based approach for pgrsons with developmental disabilities. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Haugaard, J., & Emery, R. (1989). Methodological issues in child sexual abuse research. _C_h_il_d Abuse a_r1d11egLeg, 13, 89-100. Hazzard, A., Webb, C., Kleemeire, C., Angert, L., & Pohl, J. (1991). Child sexual abuse prevention: Evaluation and one-year f ollow-up. thl_d Abuse £9 Negm, 1;, 123- 138. Hyland, K., Tsujimoto, R., & Hamilton, M. (1993). A new comparison group for research on child sexual abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, _11, 367-370. 253 Jacobs, R., Sarnowitz, R, Levy, R, Levy, J. (1991). Developing an AIDS prevention education program for persons with developmental disabilities. Sexualig and Disabilig, 2(2), 161-169. Kempton, W., & Kahn, E. (1991). Sexuality and people with intellectual disabilities: A historical perspective. Sexuality and Disability, 2(2), 93-1 11. Kohl, J. (1993). School-based child sexual abuse prevention programs. Journal of Family Violence. § (2), 137-150. \/ Krents, E., Schulman, V., & Brenner, S. (1987). Child abuse and the disabled child: Perspectives for parents. Volta Review, $6), 78-95. Krivacska, J. (1990). Designing child swuse prevention programs: Current approaches and a proposal for the prevention, reduction and identificadon of sexufl 91.8159 Illinois: Thomas. Lindholm, K. , & Willey, R. (1986). Ethnicity and differences in child abuse and sexual abuse. gigantic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, §(2), 111-125. Luthar, S. (1991). Vulnerability and resilience: A study of hi gh-risk adolescents. Q1131 Development, Q, 600-616. Margolin, L. (1991). Child sexual abuse by nonrelated caregivers. Child Abuse and m Q, 213-221. Martin, J., Anderson, J., Romans, S, Mullen, P., & O'Shea, M. (1993). Asking about child sexual abuse: Methodological implications of a two stage survey. Child Abuse and Neglect, fl, 383-392. \' Melton, G. B., (1992). The improbability of prevention of sexual abuse. In D. J. Willis, E. W. Holden, & M. Rosenberg (Eds), Prevention of child maltreatment: Developmental fld ecologicalr perspectives. (pp. 168-189). New Yorlc Wiley. Mian, M., Wehrspann, W., Klajner-Diamond, H., LeBaron, D., & Winder, C. (1986). Review of 125 children 6 years of age and under who were sexually abused. _C_hfl Abuse a_nd Neglect, 10, 223-229. 254 \,» Michigan Department of Education (1992). Michigan Model for Comprehenaive School Health Education, Grades K-8. Miles, M., & Huberrnan, A. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New _M_e_thpds, Sage: Newbury Park. Morton, M. (1992). Not being able to speak doesn't mean I can't tell: Facilitated communication and disclosures of abuse. National Resource Center on Child Sexuyal_ Abuse of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1(4), 7, l2. Muccigrosso, L. (1991). Sexual abuse prevention strategies and programs for persons with developmental disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 2(3), 261-271. Mullan, P., & Cole, S. (1991). Health care providers' perceptions of the vulnerability of persons with disabilities: Sociological frameworks and empirical analyses. Sexualig and Disability, 2(3), 221-241. Painter, 8. (1986). Research on the prevalence of child sexual abuse: New directions. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 18(4), 323-339. Pawelski, C. (1992). The world of disability. National Resogrce Center on Chfl Sequ Appse of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1(4), 3,10. Pendler, B., & Hingsburger, D. (1991). Sexuality: Dealing with parents. Sexualig and Disabilig, 2(2), 123-129. Putnam, F. (1993). Dissociative disorders in children: Behavioral profiles and problems. _C_hifl Abuse MNeglect. _l_7_, 39-45. Raggs, D., & Rowe, W. (1991). The effective use of group in sex education with people diagnosed as mildly developmentally disabled. Sexuality apd Disability, 9(4), 337- 351. Senn, C. (1983). Vulnerable: Sexual Abuse and people with a_n intellectual handic_ap. Canada: The G. Allan Roeher Institute. 255 Sgroi, S. (1989). Sexuafirusegeatment for children, adult survivors, of fenders, and parsons with mental retardation: Vulnerable populations. Volume 2, New York: Lexington Books. Sobsey, D. (1992). What we know about abuse and disabilities. National Resor1rce Center on Child Sew Abu_se of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1(4), 4, 10. Sobsey, D., & Doe, T. (1991). Patterns of sexual abuse and assault. Sexuality and Disabilig, 2(3), 243-259. Sobsey, D., Gray, 5., Wells, D., Pyper, D., Reimer-Heck, B, & Cole, S. (Eds). (1991). Disability, sexua_lity, and abuse: An annotated bibliography. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Springs, F., & Friedrich, W. (1992). Health risk behaviors and medical sequelae of childhood sexual abuse. Mayo Clin Proc, 6_7, 527-532. Stavis, P. (1991). Harrnonizing the right to sexual expression and the right to protection from harm for persons with mental disability. Sexuality_a_nd Disabiliy, 9(2), 131- 141. Steward, M., Bussey, K., Goodman, G., & Saywitz, K. (1993). Implications of developmental research for interviewing children. Child Abuse and Neglect, fl, 25-37. Summer, C. (1987). Strong and able: An abuse prevergion proggm for chilc1r':en “All. disabilities. San Pablo, California: Rape Crisis Center of West Contra Costa. Taylor & Bogdan (1984). Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: The Search for Meanings, Second Edition. Wiley & Sons: New York. Tharinger, D., Horton, C., & Millea, S. (1990). Sexual abuse and exploitation of children and adults with mental retardation and other handicaps. Child Abuse and Neglect, 14, 301-312. 256 V Tobin, P. (1992). Addressing special vulnerabilities in prevention. National Resource Center on Child Sexual Abuse of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1(4), 5, l4. Wald, M., & Woolverton, M. (1990). Risk assessment: The emperor's new clothes? Child Welfare, 6_4(6), 483-511. Walker-Hirsch, L., & Champagne, M. (1991). Circles revisited: Ten years later. Sexualityapd Disability, 2(2), 143-148. Waterman, J ., & Lusk, R. (1993). Psychological testing in evaluation of child sexual abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 1'1, 145-159. Waxman, B. (1991). Hatred: The unacknowledged dimension in violence against disabled people. Sextrality mDimbiliw. 2(3), 185-199. Witchel, R. (1991). College-student survivors of incest and other child sexual abuse. Dealing With Students from Dysfunctional Families, 24, 63-76. Womendez, C., & Schneiderrnan, K. (1991). Escaping from abuse: Unique issues for women with disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 2(3), 273-279. Wyatt, G. (1990). Sexual abuse of ethnic minority children: Identifying dimensions of victimization. Professional Psychology: Research aptl: Practice, 21(5), 338-343. Wyatt, G. (1985). The sexual abuse of Afro-American and White-American women in childhood. (M Abuse and Neglect, 2, 507-519. Wyatt, G., Guthrie, D., & Notgrass, C. (1992). Differential effects of women's child sexual abuse and subsequent sexual revictimization. Joumq of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Q2), 167-173. Wyatt, G., & Peters, S. (1986). Methodological considerations in research on the prevalence of child sexual abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 10, 241-251. Wyatt, G., & Peters, S. (1986). Issues in the definition of child sexual abuse in prevalence research. Child Abuse and Neglect, 19, 231-240. Ill). {{‘IIII 257 Yungman, J., & Hegar, R. (1986). Seeing the invisible: What social workers can do about sexual abuse. Social Work in Education, 107-120. li— “llllllllllllllllllf