 

 

 

 

 

l ‘ . b!.|)a'_t .

 

 

Entnt

'32: r.

5:5; V.

 

 

.3 ii}...-

I...

:1; .
(L):

Ash“ 1!
r . :2!)
3:.

v
a

3....1 .
3.5:. . .

x... k .

1. E... i: ..

. .inn‘ ‘ «(1

a . 9...)”

yup-ugh. .14 n

. 5;...u-ﬂs ”max...”
5 .3. a

1. B3. 3...
.. l 1... s? ..
a): (521.?
.ihﬁ :
. I‘::v1

writ k...»

b a l‘
4 i... S
223...} 13...:
:1.» by“?!
,2...

unwrldn

1.. .5: i.
I, ..
. 3.3. .w ,-

1: habit.
‘ “4.32.5.3...“
.11 a
9!. .9
via...

mm»?

ii.

i . ll.- . .
313:5

 

: 137.1:

L3, 4.

THE$S

’

HIGAN STATEU

I IIIIIII IIIIIIIIII

1293 01588 3881

 

 

 

 

 

                                 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

ASSESSING THE FEARS AND
ANXIETIES OF SECOND AND THIRD GRADERS
AFTER PARTICIPATING IN A SEXUAL ABUSE PREVENTION PROGRAM

presented by

Karen B. Kiemel

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. Psychology

degree in

 

 

ﬂame/U ﬂew/v

Major professor

Date 12/03/96

 

MSU i: an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

ASSESSING THE FEARS AND
ANXIETIES OF SECOND AND THIRD GRADERS AFTER
PARTICIPATING IN A SEXUAL ABUSE PREVENTION PROGRAM
By

Karen B. Kiemel

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial ﬁilﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology

1996

ABSTRACT
ASSESSING THE FEARS AND
ANXIETIES OF SECOND AND THIRD GRADERS AFTER
PARTICIPATING IN A SEXUAL ABUSE PREVENTION PROGRAM
By

Karen B. Kiemel

The present study employed a pre-post test experimental design to examine
whether, as compared to a control group of children, second and third grade children
demonstrated an increase in fear and anxiety as a result of participating in a sexual abuse
prevention program. One hundred and nineteen children participated. Dependent
measures included the (1) the Revised Children Manifest Anxiety Scale (Reynolds &
Richmond, 1978); (2) the Childhood Fear Scale--Revised, which measures children's fear
of sexually abusive, benign, and common childhood fear situations; (3) the Apprehension
Scale, an open ended questionnaire which assesses children's reasoning behind their fears,
and (4) the “What If” Situation Test--Revised, which measures children’s knowledge of
sexual abuse prevention. The results indicated that, as compared to the control group,
children did not evidence an increase or decrease in fear or anxiety levels as a result of
participating in a sexual abuse prevention program. However, on average, all participants
demonstrated a signiﬁcant decrease in common childhood fear situations at post-test.
Girls had higher levels of sexual abuse and common fear Situations than did boys. In
addition, older children had greater fear of benign situations. On average, all participants
demonstrated a decrease in anxiety level at posttest, with children who received the

curriculum demonstrating less of a decrease than those who did not receive the

curriculum. Moreover, children with high anxiety levels (regardless of group) had a
greater knowledge of sexual abuse prevention concepts than children with low anxiety
levels. These results indicate that children can be exposed to sexual abuse prevention

programs without incurring anxiety or fears due to participating.

This dissertation is dedicated to my brother, Tim, whose enduring

support and “words of wisdom” kept me on the path to completion.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The completion of this dissertation and the culmination of my Ph.D. would not
have been possible without the goodwill, guidance, and support of Jackie Lerner, my
advisor and chairperson. I would also like to thank my committee memberS--Hiram
Fitzgerald, Anne Bogat, and Alytia Levendosky--for their valuable contributions as well
as Marty Hogan and Margaret Kingry for their continual support. Finally, my gratitude is
extended to the staff, children, and parents of Charlotte Elementary School for their

participation and cooperation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................. viii
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
Deﬁnition of Fear ........................................................................................................ 2
Factors Inﬂuencing Children’s Fear ............................... ' ............................................. 4
Cognitive Development ................................................................................... 4

Individual Differences ..................................................................................... 7

Children's Fears and Sexual Abuse Prevention ........................................................... 8
Children's Anxiety and Sexual Abuse Prevention ..................................................... 11
Children’s Fear/Anxiety and Knowledge .................................................................. 13
Description of Children's Fears .................................................................................. 14
Rationale for the Present Study .................................................................................. 15
METHOD ................................................................................................................................ 17
Sample ......................................................................................................................... 17
Materials ...................................................................................................................... 17
"Talking about Touching" .............................................................................. 17

Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS) ................................ 18

Childhood Fear Scale--Revised (CF S-R) ...................................................... 18

"What If' Situation Test-«Revised (WIST-R) ............................................... 19

Apprehension Scale (AS) ............................................................................... 21

Design and Procedure ................................................................................................. 22
RESULTS ............................................................................................................................... 24
Children's Fear Levels ................................................................................................ 24
Gender Effects ........................................................................ v ........................ 25

Age Effects ..................................................................................................... 26

Children's Anxiety Levels .......................................................................................... 28
Gender Effects ................................................................................................ 29

Age Effects ..................................................................................................... 29

Children's Fear/Anxiety and Knowledge ................................................................... 30
Gender Effects ................................................................................................ 31

Age Effects ..................................................................................................... 31

High versus Low Anxiety and F ear ............................................................... 32

Apprehension Scale .................................................................................................... 33
Interference and Worry .................................................................................. 33

Content Categories of Children's Fears ......................................................... 33

DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 35
APPENDIX A - The Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale ........................................ 43
APPENDIX B - The Childhood Fear Scale Revised ............................................................. 48
APPENDIX C - The "What If Situation Test" Revised ......................................................... 52
APPENDIX D - The WIST-R Scoring Manual ..................................................................... 63
APPENDIX E - The Apprehension Scale .............................................................................. 77
APPENDIX F - Letter to Principal ......................................................................................... 95
APPENDIX G - Parent Letter ................................................................................................. 96

vi

APPENDIX H - Tables 1- 4O ................................................................................................. 98
APPENDIX I - Apprehension Scale Coding Manual .......................................................... 123
LIST OF REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 31

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Mean Item Scores on the CFS-R Factors ....................................................... 98

Table 2 - Sum Scores on the CFS-R Factors ................................................................. 99

Table 3 - Multivariate Analysis of Variance for the CF S-R Factors ............................. 99

Table 4 - Analysis of Variance of the CFS-R Common Fear Factor ............................ 100
Table 5 - Analysis of Variance of the CF S-R Benign Fear Factor ................................ 100
Table 6 - Analysis of Variance of the CFS-R Sexual Abuse Fear Factor ..................... 101
Table 7 - Mean Item Scores for Sexual Abuse and Common Fear Based on Gender... 101
Table 8 - Sum Scores for Sexual Abuse and Common Fear Based on Gender ............. 102
Table 9 - MAN OVA of the Sexual Abuse and Common Fear Factor by Gender ......... 103
Table 10- Analysis of Variance of the Common Fear Factor by Gender ....................... 104
Table 11- Analysis of Variance of the Sexual Abuse Factor by Gender ........................ 105
Table 12- Mean Item Scores for Benign and Common Fear Factor Based on Age ....... 106
Table 13- Sum Scores for Benign and Common Fear Factor Based on Age Group ...... 107
Table 14- MANOVA of the Benign and Common F ear Factor by Age Group ............. 108
Table 15- Analysis of Variance of the Common Fear Factor by Age Group ................. 109
Table 16- Analysis of Variance of the Benign Fear Factor by Age Group .................... 109
Table 17- RCMAS Scores for the Experimental and Control Group ............................ 110
Table 18- Analysis of Variance of the RCMAS ............................................................ 110
Table 19- RCMAS Scores Based on Gender ................................................................. 111
Table 20- Analysis of Variance of the RCMAS by Gender ........................................... 111
Table 21- RCMAS Scores Based on Age Group ........................................................... 112
Table 22- Analysis of Variance of the RCMAS by Age Group ..................................... 113
Table 23- Sum Scores for the Experimental and Control Group on the WIST-R .......... 113
Table 24- Multivariate Analysis of Variance for the WIST-R Components .................. 114
Table 25- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R RECOGNITION Component ............. 114
Table 26- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R SAY Component ................................ 114
Table 27- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R DO Component .................................. 115
Table 28- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R WHO Component ............................. 115
Table 29- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R WHAT Component ............................ 116
Table 30- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R SAY Component by Gender .............. 116

Table 31- Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R WHO Component by Age Group ....... 117
Table 32- T-Tests Between High Versus Low CF S-R Factors/Anxiety on WIST-R.... 117

Table 33- Analysis of Variance of High/Low Sexual Abuse Fear and WIST-R ........... 118
Table 34- Analysis of Variance of High/Low Benign F ear and WIST-R ...................... 118
Table 35- Analysis of Variance of High/Low Common Fear and WIST-R .................. 119
Table 36- Analysis of Variance of High/Low Anxiety and WIST-R ............................ 119
Table 37- Analysis of Variance of the AS Interference Component ............................. 120
Table 38- Analysis of Variance of the AS Worry Component ...................................... 120
Table 39- Frequencies of the AS Content Categories .................................................... 121
Table 40- Summary of Signiﬁcant Findings .................................................................. 122

viii

INTRODUCTION

The effects of participating in a sexual abuse prevention program on children’s
fears and anxieties have not been adequately investigated. Therefore, the purpose of this
study is to determine whether such effects occur. To help understand the background to
this research question relevant background will be discussed in relation to the following
areas: (1) deﬁning fear; (2) exploring factors that inﬂuence children’s fear; and (3)
examining previous research on children’s fears and anxiety in relation to sexual abuse
prevention. Then, based on this information, the rationale for the present study will be
offered.

It is estimated that one-fourth of all girls and one-sixth of all boys will be sexually
abused before they reach the age of 18 (based on a national prevalence survey by
Finkelhor, Hotaling, Lewis, & Smith, 1990). The emotional and social consequences for
these victims of child sexual abuse include--in the short term--Sleep disturbances, bed
wetting, withdrawal, clingingness, conduct problems, and school difﬁculties (for a review
see Beitchman, Zucker, Hood, DaCosta, & Akman; 1991) and-~in the long term--
depression, poorly deﬁned identity, low self-esteem, and unstable interpersonal
relationships (for a review see Beitchman, Zucker, Hood, DaCosta, Akman, & Cassavia,
1992)

To protect children from these harmful effects, many schools have implemented
programs that teach children about sexual abuse prevention (Plummer, 1986), and in
some states they are mandatory (California, AB 2443, 1984; Wisconsin Act 213, 1985).

Prevention programs ﬁrst teach children that the abuser's intentions are wrong (F inkelhor,

2
1984); without proper instruction, many children are too young to "fully understand the

nature of the behavior forced upon them" (Conte, Rosen, Saperstein, & Shermack, 1985,
p. 320). Children then learn to discriminate between appropriate and inappropriate
touches, as well as to identify situations that may lead to abuse, such as bribes and
secrets. Finally, they are taught the necessary assertiveness training and help seeking
skills to get out of potentially abusive Situations (Finkelhor, 1984).

Although sexual abuse prevention programs are meant to protect children from
potential harm, they are not yet universal due to resistance by various educators and
parents. Some adults oppose sexual abuse prevention programs because they are
concerned that prevention programs may elicit fear and anxiety in children (Binder &
McNiel, 1987; Conte & Fogarty, 1989; Garbarino, 1987; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986;
Swan, Press, & Briggs, 1985; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987); that, as a result of learning
about sexual abuse, children may become more scared of sexual abusive situations (for
example, threat of children's private parts being touched), benign situations (such as
hugs), as well as common childhood fear situations (such as thunderstorms and
strangerS)--and, that having these fears may then make children more anxious. The
present study will examine whether such concerns are valid by assessing whether second
and third graders' fears and anxieties increase as a result of participating in a sexual abuse
prevention program.

E E . . [E

In order to discern whether such effects might occur and whether these outcomes

are accepted as appropriate or deemed detrimental, an understanding of children's fears is

necessary. Fear is conceptualized as an emotional reaction to a stimulus or situation

3

(either real or imaginary) that an individual is encountering or anticipating. The
emotional reaction is characterized by a cognitive, behavioral, and/or physiological
component that may or may not occur concurrently (Dodge, 1989; Frijda, 1993; King,
Hamilton, & Ollendick, 1988; Marks, 1987; Murphy, 1985; Ohman, 1993). The
cognitive component reﬂects an individual's thought content. It is an emotional
experience relating to consciousness whereby an individual reﬂects on him or herself, for
example, thinking "I'm feeling scared of this large dog that is barking at me." The
behavioral component is manifested by an individual's emotional expression in terms of
voice tone, facial displays, posturing, and action. For example, through a trembling
voice, wide eyes, cowering, and/or walking away, a person may reveal fear of the dog.
Finally, the physiological component is an emotional state characterized by an
individual's activation of the sympathetic portion Of the autonomic nervous systems that
includes an accelerated heart rate and a heightened galvanic skin response. When
assessing fear, studies typically focus on only one of these three components.
Physiological or behavioral measures are often employed when studying infants or young
children (Jersild & Holmes, 1935; Lewis & Brooks, 1974). Cognitive measures (such as
self-reports and/or parental reports) are commonly used with both younger and older
children (e.g., Jones & Borgers, 1988).

Fears are a common and natural phenomenon which evolved due to their
protective function. The purpose of the fear experience is to warn an individual of
impending danger (either real or imaginary) (Hodiamont, 1991). Based on this warning,

an individual will try to ward Off the danger by controlling or avoiding the threat and/or

4

the individual's expression of fear will elicit help from those around him or her
(Charlesworth, 1974). Therefore, fear is adaptive by eliciting a "positive self preserving
and motivational quality" (Robinson, Rotter, Fey, & Robinson, 1991, p. 187). However,
if an individual's fear becomes too great, an inhibiting or debilitating effect may ensue.
Infants and children demonstrate a variety of fears, some of which are transitory
in nature and appear and disappear at particular developmental stages (Bauer, 1976;
Ferrari, 1986; Hall, 1897; Jersild, Markey, & Jersild, 1933; King et al., 1988; Marks,
1987; Maurer, 1965; Morris & Kratochwill, 1983; Staley, & O'Donnell, 1984). Ollendick
(1983) found that children's fears can be grouped into ﬁve factors: failure and criticism
(such as school); the unknown (the dark or thunderstorms); minor injury and small
animals (dogs); danger and death (getting lost); and medical fears (going to the doctor).
Other studies also have found children to report such fears (Angelino, Dollins, & Mech,
1956; Croake & Knox, 1973; Derevensky, 1979; Gullone & King, 1994; King et al.,
1988; King et al., 1989; Miller, Barrett, Hampe, & Noble, 1972; Ollendick, Yule, &
Ollier , 1991; Pintner & Lev, 1940; Spence & McCathie, 1993; Tikalsky & Wallace,
1988). Several different factors inﬂuence whether children will demonstrate these fears.
Children’s cognitive level, individual traits, and temperamental characteristics as
well as their personal life-course events and experiences inﬂuence the parameters of the
objects, people, and situations that they fear. Such factors will inﬂuence whether children

reveal fear as a result of participating in a sexual abuse prevention program.

W Children's stage of cognitive development is one factor

5

that will determine the parameters of the objects, people, and situations that they fear by
inﬂuencing the manner by which children perceive, conceptualize, discriminate, and
anticipate stimuli in their environment. According to Wemer's (1957) orthogenetic
principle of development, children's developmental states begin globally displaying
syncretism whereby children combine distinct qualities of an object under the same
representation. The states then proceed to become increasingly differentiated and
speciﬁc, thereby reﬂecting hierarchic integration or "marginal control" (Polanyi, 1966).
Therefore, in terms of perceiving and identifying fears, children are limited to
their input and output system, represented by both verbal and iconic symbols, which
become more distinctive and elaborated as children become older (Stevenson, 1972).
Children must reach a certain maturation level (in terms of cognition and physical ability)
for some fears to appear and other fears to disappear (Marks, 1987). For example, to fear
strangers requires that an infant is able to identify, remember, and anticipate what is
familiar and discriminate it from the unfamiliar (Hodiamont, 1991; Kagan, Kearsley, &
Zelazo, 1978; Scarr & Salapatek, 1970). Therefore, at a few months of age, an infant is
only startled by big changes in stimulation, such as loud noises. Yet, as the infant grows
and gains the ability to perceive and anticipate more subtle and complex discrepancies,
such as distinguishing the familiar from the unfamiliar, he or she will begin to fear
strange objects, Situations, and persons (Kagan et al., 1978; Scarr & Salapatek, 1970).
At age three, children are still likely to perceive formless objects on which they
perceive imaginary objects; they are unable to differentiate internal representations

(imaginary objects) from objective reality. Therefore, between the ages of three- and

6

ﬁve-years-Old, children begin to fear imaginary creatures such as monsters and ghosts
(especially when they are in the dark) as well as objects in their dreams (Angelino,
Dollins, & Mech, 1956; Draper & James, 1985; Graziano, DeGiovanni, & Garcia, 1979;
Jersild, 1950, Piaget, 1955, 1962; Sigel, 1964; Vandenberg, 1993; Werner, 1957; Werner
& Kaplan, 1952). Other fears of children this age include doctors, animals,
thunderstorms, and separation from caregivers (Bauer, 1976; Draper & James, 1985;
King et al., 1988; King et al., 1989; Morris & Kratochwill, 1983). By the age of seven,
many of these fears persist, except for fears of imaginary objects, because then most
children are able to separate reality from their mental images (Bauer, 1976; Graziano et
al., 1979; King et al., 1988; Morris & Kratochwill, 1983). In addition, children's fears
begin to reﬂect central concerns in their lives and are more realistic and speciﬁc
involving bodily injury, physical danger, and social fears (Angelino et al., 1956; Gullone
& King, 1994; King et al., 1988; Moracco & Camilleri, 1983; Morris & Kratochwill,
1983; Ollendick et al., 1991). Children are often scared of getting lost and/or kidnapped,
airplane rides, getting into ﬁghts, and personal injuries. By the age often or eleven, a
time when scholastic achievement and feeling accepted becomes critical to surviving and
adapting in children’s everyday life, fears relating to school performance, physical
appearance, and social relations begin to appear and persist during adolescence (Gullone
& King, 1994; King et al., 1989; Ollendick et al., 1991).

Finally, once fears develop, children's cognitive ability in terms of discrimination
and conceptualization, will determine the extent to which their fears generalize to other

related stimuli. This is a function of children's perception of the similarity between the

7

feared stimulus and the other stimulus or stimuli. For example, a child who has a fear of
dogs may become scared when encountering a cat if he or She conceptualizes dogs and
cats at a more global level, such as "animals," rather than viewing cats and dogs as
separate categories under the more general category of "animals." Therefore, if children
are scared of persons and situations relating to sexual abuse, the extent to which these
fears generalize to benign people, situations, or other fears is related to children's
perception of the similarity and conceptualization of such objects, people, and/or events
(Kendler & Kendler, 1956; White, 1963).

WW3, Individual differences will also inﬂuence whether
children reveal an increase or decrease in fear and anxiety as a result of receiving a sexual
abuse prevention curriculum; there are signiﬁcant differences among same-aged children
in the objects that they fear (Jersild, 1968; Robinson et al., 1991). Individual differences
in childhood fears are due, in part, to different past experiences. Some children have
been exposed to physical and sexual abuse which may make them more vulnerable to
experiencing fears and anxiety when participating in a sexual abuse prevention program
because the curriculum reminds them of their fears. Similarly, some children may have
had previous frightening interactions with strangers, babysitters, and/or relatives;
therefore, learning or be reminded that these people could become sexually abusive may
exacerbate the fears and anxiety of these children while not affecting the fears and
anxieties of other children (Wolfe & Gentile, 1988). Alternatively, children without such

a history may be more emotionally susceptible when exposed to a prevention program

8

because they have a lower baseline (at pretest) of fears and anxieties than children with
previously established fears and anxieties.

In addition to differences in past experiences, personality characteristics may
attribute to individual differences: fearfulness has been identiﬁed as a trait by some
theorists (Bronson, 1969, 1971, 1987; Marks, 1987) or as a temperamental characteristic
by others (Kagan & Moss, 1962). Therefore, for some children, fearfulness appears in
infancy and persists throughout childhood; yet, other children reveal an increase or
decrease in their level of fearfulness as they grow (Kagan, 1986). Therefore, children
who demonstrate more fear, in general, at the time when they participate in a sexual abuse
prevention program may be more prone to inciting fears or demonstrating an increase in
fear levels as a result of participating in a sexual abuse prevention program.

[I] '1 l , E 1 S 1 5 l E .

Previous studies offer some indication of possible effects of sexual abuse
prevention on children's fears and anxieties. However, the exploration of children's fears
and anxieties are oﬁen narrow in focus and entail methodological limitations. Thus, the
results have been inconclusive.

Only one study has assessed in a general fashion whether children indicate fears
as a result of receiving a sexual abuse prevention curriculum by asking participants (age
ﬁve to eight) "what made them feel 'unsafe or scared'?" (Briggs, 1991). There was no
signiﬁcant response differences between children who were exposed to a sexual abuse
prevention program and those who had no exposure; however, no pretest assessments

were made.

9

Only three studies have speciﬁcally assessed for increases in children's fear of
situations involving sexual abuse. Ratto and Bogat (1990) found that, after participating
in a sexual abuse prevention program, preschoolers when compared to controls, revealed
a slight (although nonsigniﬁcant) increase in fear, while Kiemel and Bogat (1991) found
no increase in fear. An assessment of second, fourth, and sixth graders by Garbarino
(1987) found that, aﬁer reading the Epidermal] comic about sexual abuse, approximately
38 percent of the girls and 28 percent of the boys were worried or scared because they
read that sexual abuse might happen to them--however no comparison was made with a
control group.

Studies have also examined whether children's fear Of sexual abuse generalizes to
people and circumstances that do not pose a threat of abuse, yet the circumstance might
be interpreted as such by children because they could approximate a sexually abusive
situation. For example, a "babysitter" is generally considered a benign person, unless he
or she would instigate a form of sexual abuse. Similarly, "a hug" is a form of positive
physical affection, unless it is misunderstood as a form of abuse. Assessments have
explored whether children reveal an increase in fear of benign people and circumstances,
such as, "positive physical affection" (Hazzard, Webb, Kleemeier, Angert, & Pohl, 1991;
Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele, Kast, & Melzer, 1992; Wurtele, Kast, Miller-Perrin, &
Kondrick, 1989; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987), "babysitters" (Ratto & Bogat, 1990;
Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1992; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987),
"relatives" (Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1992), "leaving the house"

(Hazzard et al., 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987),

10
"going to school" (Hazzard et al., 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986; Wurtele &

Miller-Perrin, 1987), "taking a ba " (Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987), and "going to
doctor" (Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1992). Overall, the ﬁndings indicated that
there was no Signiﬁcant increase in fears, except for "babysitters" and "going to school."
Wurtele and Miller-Perrin (1987) found that children did report a signiﬁcant increase in
fear on these two items (however, children's fear levels were still reasonably low).
Although the ﬁndings of these studies indicate that, for the most part, children do not
become scared of benign people and situations as a result of participating in a sexual
abuse prevention program, assessments have methodological limitations which qualify
any conclusions.

Rather than assessing for increases in fear on all of these examples, most studies
assessed only a few examples at a time. Moreover, common forms of physical affection,
such as "hand holding," "arm around shoulder," and "sitting on laps" were not included.
Also, the Studies examining the fears of older children (in grades 1 through 6) neglected
to assess for increases in fear of any type of physical affection (except for Hazzard et al.,
1991)

Furthermore, aside from a few exceptions (Hazzard et al., 1991; Ratto & Bogat,
1990; Wurtele, 1990; Wurtle etal., 1989), control groups were not used. Therefore, it is
impossible to verify what effect the prevention program actually had on children's benign
fears. In addition, samples sizes were generally small [except for Binder & McNiel
(1987), Hazzard et al. (1991), and Wurtele et al. (1992)] and studies of elementary-

school-aged children failed to assess participants' own reports of fear (Binder & McNiel,

11
1987; Hazzard et al., 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1987). Instead, parental reports

were used, and parents are not always cognizant of their own children's fears (Lapouse &
Monk, 1959).

These methodological limitations also frequently occurred when studies assessed
and found no increase in children's common fear of "strangers" (Binder & McNiel, 1987;
Hazzard et a1, 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986; Miltenberger & Theisse-Duffy,
1988; Ratto & Bogat, 1990; Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1991;
Wurtele et al., 1992; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987). Other types of common fears--such
as "the dark"--have been assessed with preschoolers only and, again, there have been no
increases in fears (Kiemel & Bogat, 1991; Wurtele etal., 1989; Wurtele etal., 1991;
Wurtele et al., 1992). However, except for the study by Kiemel and Bogat (1991), which
examined nine common fear situations, studies have only examined one or two common
fear items at a time.

' i x v

If children do display an increase in fear as a result of participating in a sexual
abuse prevention program, they may also show an increase in anxiety. Anxiety is an
emotional state that is more general and diffuse than the fear reaction. Accordingly,
rather than responding to a speciﬁc immediate threat, anxiety's purpose is to anticipate an
array of possible future dangers to oneself (usually centered around a speciﬁc domain)

and is characterized by high vigilance and preparation for such threats. Anxiety consists

of a worry, social concern, and physiological component (Reynolds & Richmond, 1978).

12

The worry component represents the cognitive element of anxiety and includes
rehearsing possible aversive situations and outcomes as well as methods to avoid or cope
with them (Lehrer & Woolfolk, 1982; Morris, Davis, & Hutching, 1981). This mental
rehearsal consists primarily of verbal rather than visual content and typically reﬂects
prevailing life problems (Borkovec & Inz, 1990). Worrying becomes maladaptive when
it is excessive and/or is based on imaginary situations that have little connection with
happenings in the real world.

The social concern component of anxiety is characterized by the belief that peers
are nonaccepting and critical of the child. Finally, the physiological component is
reﬂected by sympathetic responses of the autonomic nervous system such as an increase
in heart rate and galvanic skin response (i.e., sweating), which often interferes with
concentration and is Similar to the physiological response of fear.

Consequently, some children may become more anxious as a result of learning
about sexual abuse prevention. They may become preoccupied with the danger of sexual
abuse and will be hypervigilant to potential abusers and abusive situations as well as
worrying about abusive encounters. Alternatively, children who are predisposed to high
levels of anxiety may become more fearful and anxious when learning about sexual abuse
prevention because they are predisposed to sense danger in all situations that they
encounter.

Sexual abuse prevention studies have assessed whether children reveal an increase
in emotional distress (anxiety) as a result of learning about sexual abuse prevention

program. Emotional distress is likely to occur if children feel vulnerable to the danger of

13

sexual abuse (Lazarus, 1969). Theoretically, participating in a prevention program may
either increase or decrease children's feelings of vulnerability.

Findings thus far suggest that most children do not become either more or less
upset aﬁer participation. Several studies found that none of the participants showed
evidence of emotional distress (Binder & McNiel, 1987; Daro, Duerr, & LeProhn, 1987;
Hazzard et al., 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986; Miltenberger & Theisse-Duffy,
1988; Nibert, Cooper, & Ford, 1989; Swan et al., 1985; Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et al.,
1989; Wurtele et al., 1992; Wurtele & Miller-Penin, 1987); a few studies found that a
small percentage of children revealed emotional disturbances (Miller—Perrin & Wurtele,
1986; Nibert et al., 1989; Swan et al., 1985), and only two studies found that some
participants demonstrated a signiﬁcant increase in several behaviors that indicate
emotional distress (Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1992).

However, again due to methodological problems, these ﬁndings must be
interpreted cautiously. Only ﬁve studies used control groups (Hazzard et al., 1991;
Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1992). All studies, except one
(Hazzard et al., 1991), assessed children's emotional distress by parent and/or teacher
report. Children, therefore, may be suffering from anxiety that is not overtly expressed to
their parents; parent-child correlates of anxiety are generally low (Barrios, Hartmann, &
Shigetomi, 1981; Johnson & Melamed, 1979; Jones & Borgers, 1988).

:1.” ’E I! . 1K 11
Although the limited evidence suggests that children do not reveal an increase in

fears and anxieties as a result of participating in a sexual abuse prevention curriculum,

l4

assessments, typically, have not measured whether children demonstrate an increase in
fears and anxieties in relation to their knowledge about sexual abuse prevention.
Learning how to prevent sexual abuse may minimize or negate children's fear of sexual
abuse; according to Lazarus (1976), "the intensity of the threat depends on how well the
person feels that he can deal with the danger or harm which may occur" (Cox, 1980,
p.23).

Only two studies have assessed whether children's knowledge of sexual abuse
prevention inﬂuences their fears and anxieties. Wurtele et a1. (1989) found that
preschoolers receiving the Behavioral Skills Training (BST) program did not Show
evidence of a negative behavior change or an increase in fears and the children
demonstrated that they had learned the concepts of the program (sexual abuse knowledge,
prevention skills, and the ability to identify a sexually exploitive situation). However,
boys, who had participated in the “Feelings Program” Showed evidence of difﬁculties in
identifying appropriate and inappropriate touch situations and displayed a signiﬁcant
increase in crying and noncompliance (as compared to both the BST participants and a
control group of children) suggesting that emotional distress resulted because the boys
felt vulnerable to the threat of sexual abuse. Kiemel and Bogat (1991) found that,
independent of participating in a sexual abuse prevention program, preschoolers with a
high fear of sexual abusive situations showed greater knowledge about sexual abuse
prevention than children with lower fear. However, these studies only focus on

preschoolers and do not assess benign fears or speciﬁc anxiety levels.

11 .. E2111 'E

15

In addition to the methodological limitations cited above, previous studies have
neglected to understand the reasoning behind children's fears. It is possible that
participating in sexual abuse prevention programs may affect children's fears at a deeper
level by changing the rationale for their fears. For example, before a program, a child
may be scared of "neighbors" because they could yell; and, after the program, the child
may be scared of "neighbors" because they could become sexually abusive.
Ratignalifgtjhﬂmm

Much remains to be understood concerning the effects of sexual abuse prevention
programs on children's fears and anxieties. It is still unknown whether children perceive
sexual abuse as a danger, and, thus, experience fear pertaining to certain events and/or
people. If children do, indeed, reveal an increase in fear after participating in a sexual
abuse prevention program, it is unclear whether these fears are speciﬁc to potentially
abusive situations and people or generalize to benign circumstances. Further, research
has not yet examined whether signs of emotional distress also occur as a result of
participation and whether children ruminate and worry about sexual abuse. Moreover, if
children are fearful of sexual abuse, it is unclear whether learning the prevention
curriculum diminishes or exacerbates the fear.

To date, prevention studies have failed to accurately assess whether, after
participation, children reveal fears related to sexual abuse, benign situations, and common
childhood fears. In addition, large sample sizes, control groups, pretest assessments, and
children's self-reports were generally not used. Moreover, studies have failed to examine

children's fears and emotional distress concurrently. Finally, most studies have neglected

16

to assess whether knowledge of sexual abuse prevention impacts on children's fears and
anxieties. Based on these limitations, there is a need for a more thorough assessment of
the effects of a sexual abuse prevention curriculum on children's fears and anxieties.
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following two research questions:
(1) Do second and third grade children incur an increase or decrease in fears related to
sexual abuse, benign touch, and/or common childhood fear situations as a result of
participating in a sexual abuse prevention program? and (2) Do second and third grade
children incur an increase or decrease in anxiety as a result of participating in a sexual
abuse prevention program? When participants’ gender Signiﬁcantly correlates with fear
and/or anxiety pretest measures, these research questions will also be considered in light
of children’s gender. Similarly, when participants’ age signiﬁcantly correlates with fear
and/or anxiety pretest measures, these questions will be considered in light of children’s
age.

In order to answer these questions, this study employed a large Sample size, a
comparison group, random assignment, and pretest and posttest measures. Using a
variety of examples, children’s levels were examined based on three types of situations--
sexually abusive, benign, and common childhood fears. Children's anxiety level was
assessed using the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (Reynolds & Richmond,
1978). In addition, children's fear and anxiety levels were examined in relation to their
knowledge of sexual abuse prevention. Finally, an individual interview explored the
rationale for children's fears as well as whether children's fears interfered with their

everyday lives and/or incited excess worrying.

METHOD
Sample

The participants were 119 second and third graders (56 boys and 63 girls) who
attended an elementary school in a town forty miles from Michigan State University.
Due to either absenteeism, attrition (one child dropped out of the study), or children
choosing not to answer one or all of the questionnaires, not all participants fully
completed pretest and posttest measures. Therefore, the sample size is slightly smaller
than 119, depending on which analyses were conducted.

Participants had not been previously exposed to a prevention program through this
school. Children were predominantly Caucasian with a median age of 8.6 years (ages
ranged from 7.3 to 10.4 years).

Materials

Wing: "Talking about Touching" (Seattle Institute for Child
Advocacy, 1985) is a child abuse prevention curriculum designed for children in grades 1
through 3. It is widely used (for example, Tutty, 1992) and has been shown to be
effective in teaching children about sexual abuse prevention (Downer, 1984). The
curriculum was modiﬁed for this study to involve ﬁve, thirty minute presentations (over
the course of one week) which focused on sexual abuse prevention. Children learn a
"NO, GO, TELL" message by discussing picture stories as well as role-playing. In
addition, the curriculum includes take-home activities (related to each presentation) that

each participant completes with a parent.

l7

1 8
WWW) The RCMAS(ReYn01dS

& Richmond, 1978) measures children's anxiety and consists of 37 items (see Appendix
A). According to Reynolds and Richmond (1985), 28 of the items reﬂect either a
physiological (10 items), concentration (7 items), or worry/oVersensitivity component (11
items) of anxiety and the remaining nine items consist of a lie scale. Children circle YES
if the item is true about them (scored as one point), or NO (scored as zero points) if it is
not. Children's anxiety scores on the total RCMAS range from O to 37; the RCMAS
scores (excluding the nine lie items) range from 0 to 28.

The internal consistency for the total RCMAS (excluding the lie items) was .87
(including the lie items, it was .84); this is in accord with the reliabilities reported in other
studies (Martorell, Peiro, Llacer, Navarro, Flores, & Silva, 1990; Reynolds & Richmond,
1985). Furthermore, the validity of the RCMAS has been demonstrated by several studies
(Perrin & Last, 1992; Reynolds & Richmond, 1985).

W The CFS-R adds ﬁve questions to the
20-item Childhood Fear Scale (Bogat & McGrath, 1988) and assesses children's level of
fear about sexually abusive, benign, and common childhood fear situations (refer to
Appendix B). Participants indicate how scared they feel about each examples by circling
either "very scared," "a little scared," or "not scared" (scored 3, 2, 1 respectively). To
ensure that each item reﬂected the appropriate situation type (sexual abuse, benign, or
normal childhood fears), a factor analysis was conducted on participants' pretest CFS
responses (using a three-factor solution with a principal components analysis and a

varimax rotation). Due to double loading, ﬁve items were deleted. The remaining items

19

were examined to determine whether they conceptually belonged together--resulting in
the deletion of two more responses that did not pertain to sexually abusive situations.
Consequently, 18 items were used for analyses: ﬁve reﬂecting sexually abusive
situations (with an internal consistency reliability of .90 based on pretest scores and
test/retest reliability of .82 based on the control group scores); seven reﬂecting benign
situations (having an internal consistency of .85 and test/retest reliability of .64); and six
reﬂecting common childhood fear situations (having an internal consistency of .70 and
test/retest reliability of .74). CF S-R scores, on the total scale, could range from 18 to 54.
Possible scores for sexual abuse items range from 5 to 15; scores on the benign items
could range from 7 to 21; and scores on the common fear items could range from 6 to 18.
Concurrent validity of the CFS-R is indicated by the signiﬁcant correlation (based on
two-tailed test of signiﬁcance) between the total CFS-R and the RCMAS (excluding the
lie items) [1(115) = .33, p < .01] as well as the common fear factor [1; = .32 (115), p < .01]
and the lack of correlation of the benign factor with the RCMAS [r (115) = .07, p > .10 ].
Anxiety and fear have found to be related (Dong, Yang, & Ollendick, 1994; Ollendick,
Yule, & Ollier, 1991); other fear scales are validated through their correlation with
anxiety scales (e.g., Dong et al., 1994; Ollendick, 1983).
W The WIST-R is a modiﬁcation of
the WIST developed by Saslawsky & Wurtele (1986) and measures children's knowledge
of sexual abuse prevention concepts (see Appendix C). Comprised of four scenarios
(three portraying sexually abusive Situations and one depicting a benign touch situation),

the WIST-R assesses children's knowledge across ﬁve dimensions: ability to

20

discriminate between appropriate and inappropriate touch (RECOGNITION), to escape
the potentially abusive Situation through words (SAY), such as saying "no;" to act (DO),
for example, by leaving the situation; to tell adults (WHO), and to report the sexual abuse
incident (WHAT). On the dimension of RECOGNITION, a child received 1 point for
correctly recognizing whether or not each situation involved a sexually abusive situation;
each participant's total score was determined by summing across all four stories, thus, the
possible range was 0 to 4. On the remaining dimensions, total scores were based on
summing across the three vignettes that involved sexually abusive situations (see
Appendix D for coding manual). With the variable, SAY, children's scores were
determined by their verbal ability to verbally reject the perpetrator for each story. A
maximum of nine SAY responses were coded on each vignette, with each response being
scored based on the following criteria: a SAY response received 2 points for a direct
refusal (e.g., "Tell him 'no'."), 1 point for an indirect refusal (such as a bribe or a threat),
and 0 points for compliant answers (e.g., "I would do it."). Total possible scores on the
SAY dimension (summing across the three vignettes) ranged from 0 (no say responses
offered) to 54. Scoring of the dimension DO was based on children's ability to
effectively leave the sexually abusive situation. A maximum of nine DO responses per
question were coded based on the following criteria: 2 points were given for an
immediate escape, 1 point for a delayed or help seeking response, and 0 points for
remaining in the situation. Total possible scores on the DO dimension (summing across
the three vignettes) ranged from 0 (no say responses offered) to 54. The variable, WHO,

scoring was based on the number of people to whom a child would tell about the sexual

 

21

abuse request--1 point for each response. For every vignette, a child could receive a
maximum of 5 points, thus, the possible total score for WHO (summing across the three
stories) ranged from 0 to 15 points. Scoring of the last variable, WHAT, was determined
by how completely participants would inform an adult about the sexual abuse incidence.
For each vignette, a child received 2 points for accurately identifying both the perpetrator
and the situation (e.g., "this man in the park told me if I took my pants off and let him
touch my private parts he would buy me an ice cream cone"), 1 point for correctly
identifying either the perpetrator or the Situation, or for vaguely describing both the
perpetrator and the situation, and 0 points for an uninformative disclosure. The possible
range for total scores on WHAT (by summing across the three vignettes) was zero to six
points. Coding was conducted by undergraduate research assistants who were
extensively trained. Interrater reliability was 93 percent.

ApprehensimSgalﬂAﬁ), The Apprehension Scale was developed for this study
and is an open-ended questionnaire designed to assess the reasoning behind children's
fears often different people or events (such as "neighbors" or "going to the doctor") by

asking "What is it about 'neighbors' that makes you scared?" (see Appendix E). The ten

items of the AS are as follows: "neighbors," "babysitters, relatives, strangers,"

"hugs/kisses," "leaving the house," "going to school," "going to the doctor, someone
asking to touch your private parts," and "someone asking you to touch their private
parts." See results for information about scoring. The AS also assesses whether

children's fears of these ten items interferes with their everyday activities and/or incites

worrying. Children are asked whether feeling scared every prohibits them from doing

22

something that they want to do. If children answer “yes,” the activity or activities are

recorded and the frequency with which the activity is prevented is scored based on a 4

99 ‘6 99 6‘

point score: “once in a while, sometimes, a lot of the time,” and “all of the time.” In
addition, children are asked whether they ever worry or feel scared when they are not
around the feared stimulus. If children answer “yes,” then on what occasion the children
worry is recorded as well as the frequency with which they worry (based on the same 4
point scale as above).

W

The participating school was elicited by sending a letter and a copy of the sexual
abuse prevention curriculum to principals in the greater Lansing area describing the study
and inviting their second and third graders to participate (see Appendix F); the school
consisted of four second grade and four third grade classrooms. A parent letter (which
included a consent form) was sent home with the children explaining the study and
offering a parent meeting, where more information about the curriculum and evaluation
was given (see Appendix G).

The testing and curriculum were administered to the children using the following
procedure. The eight participating classrooms were paired up and, within each classroom
pair, children with parental consent to participate were matched for gender and randomly
assigned to either the treatment or the delayed treatment control group. Due to some
incomplete questionnaires, the resulting number of boys and girls was not exactly equal

between the treatment and the control group. Before testing, children became familiar

with the curriculum teachers and interviewers at lunchtime and recess. All participants

23

gave their verbal consent and were assessed by trained graduate and undergraduate
students one week before and one week after the experimental groups received the
curriculum. Assessments included the CFS-R and RCMAS, which were administered in
a group. In addition, the WIST-R and AS were administered individually by the primary
investigators and trained undergraduate students. One of two trained graduate students
taught the sexual abuse prevention curriculum, "Talking about Touching," to the
treatment group, while the comparison group and nonparticipants took part in an alternate
activity. Once the study was over (that is, the posttest assessments were completed) the

control group then received the curriculum.

RESULTS
Cll'lliliili'i EiaIZI iifili

One hundred and ten participants completed both the pretest and posttest CFS-R:
all results are displayed in Tables contained in Appendix H. Children’s mean and sum
scores are displayed in Table 1 and 2 (respectively). At pretest, an analysis of variance
revealed that there was there was no signiﬁcant difference between the experimental and
the control group on the sexual abuse factor, the benign factor, nor the common fear
factor [B (3, 46) = .27 , p > .10].

In order to assess whether children's fear levels increased as a result of
participating in the sexual abuse prevention program, a 2 X 2 repeated measures
MANOVA (Condition by Time) was conducted with the sexual abuse, common fear, and
benign factor of the CF S-R as the dependent measures. The results indicate that there
was no signiﬁcant difference between the experimental and control group over time on
the CFS-R’s factors [E (1, 108) = .23, p > .10]. However, children’s fear level
signiﬁcantly decreased over time [F (1, 108) = 4.30, p < .05]. Results from the
MANOVA are displayed in Table 3.

Subsequent AN OVAS were conducted and revealed that the time effect was due to
the common fear factor [F (1, 108) = 7.78, p < .01] and not the benign factor [E (1, 108) =
.32, p > .10] nor the sexual abuse factor [F (1, 108) = .50, p > .10]: On average, all
participants revealed a signiﬁcant decrease in common fear level over time. In addition,
there was a main effect for fear [E(2,107) = 180.38, p < .01]. Children scored highest on

the sexual abuse factor (M = 2.36) followed by the common fear factor (M = 1.47);

24

25
children scored lowest on the benign factor (M = 1.13). Results from the ANOVAS are

displayed in Table 4, 5, and 6.

Participating in the sexual abuse prevention program may affect children
differently based on their gender and/or age. Therefore correlational analyses were
conducted on pretest scores on the CF S factors to determine whether there was any
relationship between the factors and children’s age and/or gender.

W There was a signiﬁcant positive correlation between gender and
the pretest common fear factor [r(110) = .38, p < .01] as well as the pretest sexual abuse
factor [I (110) = .27, p < .01]. However, there was not a signiﬁcant correlation between
gender and the pretest benign factor [1:(110) = -.13, p > .10]. Consequently, a 2 X 2 X 2
repeated measures MANOVA (Condition by Time by Gender) was conducted with the
sexual abuse factor and common fear factor as the dependent measures. T-tests were ﬁrst
conducted to assess whether there were any signiﬁcant differences between the
experimental and control group for boys’ scores on the pretest sexual abUse and common
fear factor as well as whether there were signiﬁcant differences between girls’ scores on
these dimensions: no signiﬁcant differences were found for boys on the pretest common
fear factor [1(46) = .12, p > .10] nor on the pretest sexual abuse fear factor [1; (48) = -.57,
p > .10]. Similarly, there were no signiﬁcant differences between the experimental and
control group for girls on the pretest common fear factor [1 (57) = .56, p > .10] nor on the
pretest sexual abuse factor [1(57) = 1.22, p> .10]. Table 7 and 8 provide, respectively,
mean and sum scores at both pre- and posttest based on children’s gender and group type.

The results indicate that there was not a group by gender by time interaction [E (1 ,

106) = .05, p > .10]. However there was a Signiﬁcant gender by fear by time interaction

26

with boys having similar common fear levels over time and a decline in sexual abuse fear
levels over time; girls’ common fear level declined over time and their sexual abuse
levels remained almost constant [E (1, 106) = 11.47, p < .01]. Results of the MANOVA
are displayed in Table 9.

In addition, there was a Signiﬁcant main effect for gender [E (1, 106) = 20.84, p <
.01]. Therefore, separate repeated measures univariate analyses were conducted on the
common fear and sexual abuse factor to determine whether one or both of the factors
were inﬂuencing the signiﬁcant ﬁndings. The results indicated that on the common fear
factor there was a main effect with girls having greater levels of common fear than did
boys [E (1,106) = 12.98, p < .01]. Similarly, on the sexual abuse factor, there was a main
effect with girls having signiﬁcantly higher levels of fear than did boys [E (l , 106) =
14.05, p < .01]. Results of the ANOVAS are displayed in Table 10 and 11.

In addition, results of the ANOVA supported the MAN OVA’s signiﬁcant fear by
gender by sex interaction. On the common fear factor there was a Signiﬁcant interaction
between gender and time: girls revealed a decline in fear level over time whereas boys’
fear level remained almost constant [E (1 ,106) = 5.17, p < .05]. On the sexual abuse
factor there was a trend with boys decreasing in fear level over time and girls’ fear level
remaining almost constant [E (1,106) = 2.99, p < .10].

AggEﬂhcﬁ. Age was classiﬁed into two categories: younger versus older
children based on a median split of 8.6 years of age. Although not signiﬁcant, there was
a trend of a positive relationship between age and the pretest benign factor [1: (110) = .18,

p < .10] and a negative relationship between age and the pretest common fear factor [r

27

(110) = -.18, p < .10]. However, there was no trend with the sexual abuse factor [x (110)
= .09, p > .10]. Consequently, a 2 X 2 X 2 repeated measures MANOVA (Condition by
Time by Age) was conducted with benign and common fear factor Of CFS-R as the
dependent measures. T-tests were ﬁrst conducted to assess whether there were any
signiﬁcant differences between younger participants’ scores on the pretest benign and
common fear factor in the experimental and control group as well as whether there were
differences between older participants’ scores on these dimensions: no signiﬁcant
differences were found for younger participants on the pretest common fear factor [1 (52)
= .52, p > .10] nor on the pretest benign factor [1 (52) = -1.13, p > .10]. Similarly there
were no signiﬁcant differences between the experimental and control group for older
participants on the pretest common fear factor [1 (54) = .56, p > .10] nor on the pretest
benign factor [1(54) = .35, p > .10]. Table 12 and 13 provide children’s mean and sum
scores, respectively, on both pre- and posttest based on age and group type.

The results of the MANOVA indicated that there was a trend for a group by age
by time interaction [E (1 , 106) = 3.41 , p < .10]: Older children in the experimental and
control group and younger children in the control group had similar levels of fear over
time, whereas younger children in the experimental group showed a decline in fear over
time. Results of the MANOVA are displayed in Table 14.

Repeated measures univariate analyses were then conducted on the common fear
and benign factor to determine whether one or both of the factors was inﬂuencing the
signiﬁcant interaction. Results of the ANOVA indicated that this trend was due to the

common fear factor [E (l, 106) = 2.88, p < .10]--see Table 15 and 16.

28

The MANOVA also revealed that there was a signiﬁcant age by fear interaction.
Younger children demonstrated a greater discrepancy between normal and benign fear
levels than did older children [E (1, 106) = 7.67, p < .01]. In addition, the ANOVA on
the benign factor indicated that older children had higher levels of benign fear that did
younger children [E (1, 106) = 3.77, p = .055].

Childmn'iAnxistaLLﬂils

One hundred and ten participants completed both the pretest and posttest
RCMAS: 50 boys and 60 girls. Children’s mean and sum scores are displayed in Table
17. Anxiety scores were based on all items of the RCMAS , excluding the lie items;
studies typically exclude the lie items when employing the RCMAS (for example,
Martorell et al., 1990). At pretest, there was no signiﬁcant difference between the
experimental and control group on the RCMAS [t (100) = 1.20, p > .10].

In order to assess whether children's anxiety level increased as a result of
participating in the sexual abuse prevention program, a 2 X 2 repeated-measures ANOVA
(Group by Time) was conducted with the total RCMAS (excluding the lie scale) as the
dependent measure. The analysis on the RCMAS revealed that there was a main effect
for time with all participants displaying a Signiﬁcant decrease in anxiety over time [E (1 ,
108) = 52.30, p S .01]. Moreover, there was a signiﬁcant interaction between the control
group and the experimental group over time with children in the control group exhibiting
a greater decrease in anxiety over time than the experimental group [E (l , 108) = 3.91, p

S .05]. Table 18 displays results of the ANOVA.

29

Post hoc analyses were conducted pertaining to participants’ age and gender.
Correlational analyses revealed that there was a positive relationship between pretest
anxiety scores and gender [r(110) = .31 , p < .01] as well as between pretest anxiety
scores and age [I (110) = .20, p < .05]. Therefore, two separate univariate analyses were
conducted: 1) a 2 X 2 X 2 repeated measures ANOVA (Condition by Time by Sex) with
the RCMAS as the dependent measure and 2) a repeated measures ANOVA (Condition
by Time by Age), again with the RCMAS as the dependent measure.

W T-tests revealed that there was no signiﬁcant difference between
boys in the experimental group from boys in the control group on pretest scores of the
RCMAS [1(48) = 1.39, p > .10]. Similarly, there was no Signiﬁcant difference between
girls in the experimental group from girls in the control group on the RCMAS [1 (5 8) =
.78, p > .10]. Table 19 provides children’s mean scores for both pre- and posttest based
on gender and group type. Results of the ANOVA revealed that there was no signiﬁcant
interaction between condition and gender over time on the RCMAS [E (1,106) = .82, p >
.10]. However there were main effects with girls demonstrating signiﬁcantly higher
levels of anxiety than boys on the RCMAS [E ( 1,106) = 11.49, p < .01]. Table 20
displays results of the ANOVA.

AggEffegts. T-tests revealed that there was no signiﬁcant difference between
younger children in the experimental group and younger children in the control group on
pretest scores of the RCMAS [1(48) = 1.39, p > .10]. Similarly, there was no signiﬁcant
difference between older children in the experimental group and Older children in the

control group on pretest scores of the RCMAS [t (58) = .78, p > .10]. Table 21 provides

3O

children’s mean scores for both pre— and posttest based on age and group type. The
ANOVA indicated that there was no signiﬁcant interaction between group and age over
time on the RCMAS [E (1,106) = .02, p > .10]. However, there was a main effect for age
with older children demonstrating signiﬁcantly higher anxiety-levels than younger
children on the RCMAS [E (1 , 106) = 6.17, p < .05]. Table 22 displays results of the
ANOVA.
WNW

Based on an analysis of variance, there was no signiﬁcant difference between the
experimental and control group on the WIST-R components [E (5, 104) = 1.45, p >.01].
Refer to Table 23 for sum scores on the WIST-R components. In order to assess whether
children's knowledge levels increased as a result of participating in the sexual abuse
prevention program, a 2 X 2 repeated measures MANOVA (Condition by Time) was
conducted with the WIST-R components as the dependent measures (RECOGNITION,
SAY, DO, WHO, WHAT). The results of the MANOVA are displayed “in Table 24 and
indicated that there was not a signiﬁcant interaction of condition by time on the WIST-R
[E (1, 108) = .17, p > .10]; however, all participants showed a signiﬁcant change in
knowledge over time [E (1, 108) = 6.88, p S .01]. Separate repeated measures ANOVA
on each of the WIST-R components revealed that the signiﬁcance was due to the WHO
component [E (1, 108) = 9.47, p < .01] with children increasing in the number of people
they would tell about the abuse at posttest. Results of the ANOVAS are displayed in

Table 25 through 29.

31

Correlational analysis (based on two-tailed test of Signiﬁcance) were conducted to
determine whether the WIST-R components were correlated with participant’s age and/or
gender. SAY was the only component to correlate signiﬁcantly with gender [r (110) =
.22, p < .05]. WHO was the only component to correlate signiﬁcantly with age [I (110) =
.20, p < .05].

Qenglgnﬁffecj. T-tests revealed that there was no Signiﬁcant difference between
boys in the experimental group from boys in the control group on SAY pretest scores of
the WIST-R [t (47) = .18, p > .10]. Similarly, there was no signiﬁcant difference between
girls in the experimental group from girls in the control group on SAY pretest scores
[I (59) = -1.97, p > .10]. A 2 X 2 X 2 repeated measures ANOVA (Condition by Gender
by Time) was conducted and the results indicated that there was no signiﬁcant interaction
of group type by gender over time on the SAY component [E (1, 106) = 1.39, p > .10].
However, there was a trend of a main effect for gender with girls having higher scores on
the SAY component than boys [E (1 , 106) = 3.56, p < .10]. Table 30 diSplayS results
from the AN OVA.

W. T-tests revealed that there was no signiﬁcant difference between
younger children in the experimental group and younger children in the control group on
WHO pretest scores of the WIST-R [1(52) = -.44, p > .10]. Similarly, there was no
signiﬁcant difference between older children in the experimental group and older children
in the control group on WHO pretest scores [1(54) = 1.31, p > .10]. A 2 X 2 X 2 repeated
measures ANOVA (Condition by Age by Time) was conducted using the WHO

component of the WIST-R as the dependent measure. There were no signiﬁcant

32

interaction between the experimental and control group and age over time on the WHO
component [E (1 , 106) = .40 , p >.10]. However, younger children revealed a signiﬁcant
increase over time on the WHO component, whereas Older children did not demonstrate
this increase [E (1,106) = 5.11, p < .05]. Table 31 displays the results of the ANOVA.

HEW It was also examined whether participants'
fear and/or anxiety level inﬂuenced their knowledge of sexual abuse prevention as a
result of participating in the program. Participants were divided into two groups based
on high and low fear levels for each of the CFS-R factors: sexual abuse, benign, and
common fear. Participants were also divided into high and low fear level groups based
on anxiety levels as determined by the RCMAS (excluding the lie items). Division of the
groups were based on median splits of pretest scores, however some judgments were also
made. Six participants, whose scores were in the middle on the RCMAS were not
analyzed. Cut-off on the common fear factor resulted in uneven sample sizes, because
there was a gap between scores. Similarly, on the benign factor, the sample size of the
two groups were uneven because 75 of the children had the same score (the minimum
score) and therefore, comprised the low level fear group. Each of these groups were
separately assessed via a repeated-measures AN OVAs--2 X 2 (condition by time) with
the WIST-R as the dependent variable. Based on separate t-test, there was no signiﬁcant
difference on children’s pretest WIST-R scores between the high and low fear groups on
each of the CFS-R factors as well as on the anxiety scale (see Table 32).

The results indicated that there was no signiﬁcant interaction between fear levels

on the CFS-R factors, condition, and knowledge level over time for any of the groups

33

(see Table 33 through 35). However, there was a signiﬁcant ﬁnding with the high versus
low anxiety level group: children in the high anxiety group demonstrated greater
knowledge [E (l, 99) = 4.54, p < .05]--refer to Table 36.

Apprehensimﬁeal:

W A 2 X 2 repeated measures ANOVA (condition by time)
was conducted employing children's response to determine whether their fears ever
interfered by preventing them from conducting their everyday activities
(PREVENTION). Another 2 X 2 repeated measures ANOVA (condition by time) was
conducted to determine whether children ever worried about the fear (WORRY). T-tests
revealed that there was no signiﬁcant difference between the experimental and control
group on pretest scores for PREVENTION [t (88) = -.61 , p > .10] and pretest scores for
WORRY [1(88) = -.44, p > .10]. The analyses indicated that there was no signiﬁcant
difference between the control and the experimental group over time in terms of both
PREVENTION [E (1,92) = 1.26, p > .10] and WORRY [E (1,88) = .22,p > .10]--refer to
Table 37 and 38, respectively. However, all participants demonstrated a signiﬁcant
decrease over time: PREVENTION [E (1,92) = 7.66, p < .01] and WORRY [E (1,88) =
14.39, p < .01]. Due to low response rate of children indicating that their fears incite
interference and/or worry, the frequency and descriptors of interference and worry were
not analyzed.

WWW; Using responses from the Apprehension
Scale, children's rationale for their fears were analyzed based on a content analysis.

Pretest responses were read to determine which content areas they reﬂected. These

34

content areas were continually reﬁned and reconceptualized based on the analysis of four
graduate students and two faculty members. Twenty-three content categories resulted
(see Appendix I for the scoring manual which includes a description of the content
categories). Nineteen of the categories describe the children’s fear: Sexual Abuse;
New/unknown Situations; Benign Touch; Nonspeciﬁed Aggression; Concern For
Person's Well Being; Kidnapping; Hitting; Threat of Death; Burglary; Nonintentional
Harm/Child; Visceral Reaction; Unwanted Activity; Child In Trouble; Harrning Others;
Verbal Aggression; Nonintentional Harm/Other; Person In Trouble; Vague Response;
Child Does Not Know. Four of the content categories describe where the child is located
when experiencing the fear: When Confronted with Abuse; When Child is Alone; When
Child is in a Public Place; When Child is Home. Coding of the content categories was
conducted by two trained research assistants; interrater reliability was 80%. Table 39
displays the frequencies of the content categories collapsed across the ten questions at
pre- and post-test for both the experimental and control group. The results indicate that

the content categories are similar for children in both the experimental and control group.

DISCUSSION

The present study found that second and third graders did not reveal an increase in
fear levels of sexually abusive, benign, or common fear situations as a result of
participating in a sexual abuse prevention program (refer to Table 40 for a summary of
signiﬁcant ﬁndings). Speciﬁcally, all participants revealed a decrease in common fear
levels. In addition, children did not demonstrate an increase in anxiety levels. All
participants displayed a decrease in anxiety over time; however, the control group
revealed a greater decline over time. These ﬁndings are substantiated by the study's use
of a large sample size, control group, random assignment, as well as pretesting and
posttesting procedures, which previous investigations studying fears in relation to sexual
abuse prevention programs rarely used. In addition, this study extended the previous
investigations by employing an extensive assessment of elementary aged children's fears
and anxieties: children's anxiety levels were measured through self-reports employing a
standardized measure and children's fears were assessed across three dimensions: sexual
abuse, benign, and common childhood fear situations.

This study also revealed some age effects with older children demonstrating
greater benign fear levels and greater anxiety. In addition, younger children increased in
knowledge over time. Results of this study also indicate some gender effects with girls
revealing greater level of overall fear, sexual abuse, and common childhood fear
situations as well as demonstrating higher anxiety levels. Moreover, this study found that
children did not reveal an increase in their fears preventing them from conducting their

everyday activities and or inciting worrying. Finally, the study’s content analysis

35

36
revealed that children’s reasoning behind their fears does not change as a result of

participating in a sexual abuse prevention program.

The results of this study are generally consistent with those of previous studies
that assessed children's fears and/or anxiety as a result of participating in a sexual abuse
prevention program. Briggs (1991) had found no increase in children's fears when
responding to the open ended question asking them what made them feel "unsafe or
unscared." In addition, studies assessing children's fears of benign people and situations
generally found no increase in fear levels following a sexual abuse prevention program
(Hazzard et al., 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986; Ratto & Bogat, 1990; Wurtele,
1990; Wurtele et al., 1992; Wurtele etal., 1989; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987).
Similarly, studies have not found an increase in children's common fear of "strangers"
(Binder & McNiel, 1987; Hazzard et a], 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986;
Miltenberger & Theisse-Duffy, 1988; Ratto & Bogat, 1990; Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et
al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1991; Wurtele et al., 1992; Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987) or
"the dark" (Kiemel & Bogat, 1991; Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1991). Previous
studies have not speciﬁcally assessed for fears relating to sexual abuse prevention in
elementary aged children as a result of participating. However, Garbarino (1987) found
that 38 percent of the girls and 28 percent of the boys were worried or scared because
they read that sexual abuse might happen to them; yet these results are not based on a
comparison group or pretest measures. The few studies that did employ pretest measures
and a comparison group focused on preschool aged children and found no signiﬁcant
increases in fear of sexual abuse situations (Kiemel & Bogat, 1991; Ratto & Bogat,

1990). In accord with the present ﬁnding, previous studies found that most children do

37

not reveal an increase or decrease in anxiety as a result of participating in a sexual abuse
prevention program (Binder & McNiel, 1987; Daro, Duerr, & LeProhn, 1987; Hazzard et
al., 1991; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 1986; Miltenberger & Theisse-Duffy, 1988; Nibert et
al., 1989; Swan et al., 1985; Wurtele, 1990; Wurtele et al., 1989; Wurtele et al., 1992;
Wurtele & Miller-Perrin, 1987).

Before participating in the program, children revealed that they did have
knowledge about sexual abuse prevention. Previous research studies have also found that
children demonstrate considerable knowledge about sexual abuse prevention before
receiving a prevention program (Saslawsky & Wurtele, 1986; Swan et al., 1985; Wolfe,
MacPherson, Blount, & Wolfe, 1986). In addition, results on the knowledge measure
revealed that children in both the experimental and control group gained in knowledge
over time. Speciﬁcally children who demonstrated high anxiety levels had greater
knowledge of sexual abuse prevention; however, knowledge level was similar regardless
of high or low level of fears. It is possible that experiencing greater anxiety heightens
children’s motivation to learn about dangers (Eysenck, 1976)--in this case sexual abuse
prevention. The present results are not in accord with those of Kiemel and Bogat (1991)
who found that preschoolers with greater fear of sexual abuse had greater knowledge.
However, the discrepant ﬁndings may be due to the difference in the children ages who
were assessed (preschoolers versus elementary school aged children).

The ﬁnding that younger children increased in knowledge over time may indicate
that children gained knowledge as a result of pretesting. Speciﬁcally, the increase in

knowledge is in enumerating the people that children should tell about the abuse. There

38

are several possible explanations for the increase. First, the experience of being asked
questions about sexual abuse and its prevention may have incited children to learn more
about sexual abuse through the program (for those who participated) and through other
means, such as discussing sexual abuse prevention with parents or other children.
Second, children may have augmented their knowledge about sexual abuse prevention
through the process of responding on the knowledge measure. Scoring is based on
quality and quantity of responses; therefore, being prepared for the questions at posttest,
children may have been better able to offer a greater number of responses and/or more
effective responses. To date, only two studies have assessed for pretesting effects by
using a Solomon four-group design. Gibson and Bogat (1993) found pretesting effects
with preschoolers in the opposite direction of this on a subset of the knowledge measures.
Tutty (1992), assessing elementary children, found no pretesting effects.

The fact that the experimental group did not increase in knowledge as a result of
participating is not atypical (see Tutty, 1992). Moreover, when statistical differences are
found showing that children learn from the program, the magnitude of change is usually
small (Conte et al., 1985; Downer, 1984; Fryer, Kraizer, & Miyoshi, 1987; Saslawsky &
Wurtele, 1986; Tutty, 1985; Wolfe et al., 1986)--although Nemerofsky, Carron, and
Rosenberg (1994) found a larger increase in knowledge. Therefore, the increase in
knowledge may not be meaningful in a practical sense. However, Tutty (1992) contends
that, although children may not be “learning more,” children may still be gaining in skills

as a result of participating. Prevention programs may encourage children to change their

39

attitudes towards sexual abuse and its prevention; thereby augmenting children’s abilities
to prevent sexual abuse.

The results of this study also indicate that, on average, all participants displayed a
decrease in anxiety over time. This may reﬂect a contextual event: At pretest, the
Persian Gulf War was impending and beginning, whereas, by posttesting, the war had
subsided. In addition, the results indicate that children who did not participate in the
sexual abuse prevention program exhibited a greater decrease in anxiety than the children
who did participate. This ﬁnding suggests that hearing about sexual abuse prevention
may remind children about the danger of sexual abuse, thereby, augmenting their anxiety
level in relation to the children who did not participate.

The common childhood fears that were reported on the CF S-R and the AS were
typical for children that age (Ollendick, King, & Frary, 1989). Older children
demonstrated more fear of benign touches. This may reﬂect a normal developmental
change, where older children become less affectionate. Gender differenCes on the fear
and anxiety scales also reﬂect typical differences between girls and boys (Dong et al.,
1994; Gullone & King, 1994; King, Gullone, & Stafford, 1990; Spence & McCathie,
1993). Girls revealed higher levels of fear of individuals and situations relating to sexual
abuse prevention and common childhood fears. In addition, girls revealed more anxiety
on the RCMAS.

Because the results from this study are in accord with previous ﬁndings, there is
building evidence that allowing children to participate in a sexual abuse prevention

program is a safe practice and thus should be encouraged. However, there are limitations

40

in this study. (1) Effects from participating in a sexual abuse prevention program may
have been revealed had a much larger sample size been used. Similarly, additional age
and gender effects and interactions may have been found with a larger sample size. Yet,
even if such differences were found, although signiﬁcant, they may not reﬂect
meaningful differences in the real world. (2) The participating children were not
randomly selected--rather parental permission was needed. Therefore, there may have
been differences between the children who were allowed to participate and those who
were not. These differences may have inﬂuenced the effects of receiving the curriculum.
For example, parents who have already discussed with their children the dangers of
sexual abuse prevention may have been more likely to allow their children to participate
than those who had not. (3) Furthermore, program effects were assessed with a
homogenous sample of children in terms of age, the community in which they lived, and
their ethnicity (which was primarily Caucasian). Consequently, the generalizability of
these results to children of various socio-economic and ethnic groups is limited. (4) In
addition, because the Childhood Fear Scale-Revised is newly developed, its reliability
needs to be assessed with other population of children. Moreover, the CFS-R’s validity
needs to be substantiated through behavioral measures and other fear scales.
Consequently, future research is needed that assesses children of all age groups
with various socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds employing random selection. In
addition, future studies need to add to the reliability and validity of the Childhood Fear

Scale and Apprehension Scale. Furthermore, the effects of participating should be

41

understood in terms of other variables, such as children’s temperament, self-efﬁcacy, and
perceived threat of sexual abuse (Jacobs, Hashima, & Kenning, 1995).

Moreover, in addition to children’s fears and anxieties, other possible negative
effects of participating in a sexual abuse prevention program needs further exploration.
For example, one effect is determining whether children who are exposed to a sexual
abuse prevention feel guilty if they have been previously abused or become abused in the
future because they were unable to successfully deter the abuser (Sang, 1994). Another
possible effect is whether children’s attitudes toward sex and/or sexual behavior is
negatively impacted (Currier & Wurtele, 1996; Finkelhor, 1986; Tharinger et al., 1988;
Trudell & Whatley, 1988; Wurtele et al., 1992).

Any negative effects must be considered in light of the following: Although there
is evidence that children learn about sexual abuse prevention, “there is no evidence to
support or refute the hypothesis that educating children, parents or teachers with regard to
abduction and sexual victimization actually reduces the occurrence of such offenses”
(MacMillian et al., 1994, p. 24). Moreover, some researchers believe that children should
not be the focus of child sexual abuse prevention (Cohn, 1986; Repucci & Haugaard,
1989; Tutty, 1991). Instead, the focus of prevention should be directed to other areas. (1)
Legislative action that inhibits a perpetrator’s motivation to become abusive (McCann,
1995). (2) Intervening with families that have characteristics that are linked to having a
sexually abused child, such as parental absence, family conﬂict (Benedict & Zautra,
1993; Shah, Dail, & Heinrichs, 1995), and substance abuse (Cavallin, 1966; Curtis,

1986; Famularb, 1992), as well as parents who have a childhood history of abuse (Faller,

42

1989). And (3) Implementing programs directed towards parents so that parents,
themselves, can take actions to protect their children from sexual abuse (Tutty, 1993); for
parents often understand little about the prevalence as well as the circumstances under

which sexual abuse occurs (Elrod & Rubin, 1993).

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A

REVISED CHILDREN’S MANIFEST ANXIETY SCALE

NAME
TEACHER

 

 

Code #
Interviewer
W Circle YES, if you think that the statement is TRUE about you.
Circle NO, if you think that statement is W about you.

 

LP I have trouble making up my mind.

YES NO

 

2.W I get nervous when things do not go the right way for me.

YES NO

 

3.S Others seem to do things easier than I can.

YES NO

 

4.L I like everyone I know.

YES NO

 

5.P Often I have trouble getting my breath.

YES NO

 

6.W I worry a lot of the time.

YES NO

 

43

44

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.W I am afraid of a lot of things.
YES NO
8.L I am always kind.
YES NO
9.? I get mad easily.
YES NO
10.w I worry about what my parents will say to me.
YES NO
ll.S I feel that others do not like the way I do things.
YES NO
12.L I always have good manners.
YES NO
13.P It is hard for me to get to sleep at night.
YES NO
14.w I worry about what other people think about me.

YES NO

 

45

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.S I feel alone even when there are people with me.

YES NO
16.L I am always good.

YES NO
17.P Often I feel sick in my stomach.

YES NO
18.W My feelings get hurt easily.

YES NO
19.P My hands feel sweaty.

YES NO
20.L I am always nice to everyone.

YES NO
21 .P I am tired a lot.

YES NO
22w I worry about what is going to happen.

YES NO

 

46

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23.S Other children are happier than 1.
YES NO
24." I tell the truth every single time.
YES NO
25.P I have bad dreams.
YES NO
26.w My feelings get hurt easily when I am fussed at.
YES NO
27.S I feel someone will tell me I do things the wrong way.
YES NO
28.L I never get angry.
YES NO
29.P I wake up scared some of the time.
YES NO
3O.W I worry when I go to bed at night.

YES NO

 

47

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31.S It is hard for me to keep my mind on my schoolwork.
YES NO
32.L I never say things I shouldn't.
YES NO
33.p I wiggle in my seat a lot.
YES NO
34w 1 am nervous.
YES NO
35.S A lot of people are against me.
YES NO
36.L I never lie.
YES NO
37.w I often worry about something bad happening to me.

YES NO

 

P denotes items in the physiological subscale.
w denotes items in the worry/oversensitivity subscale.

S . . . .
denotes Items 1n the soc1al concems/concentratron subscale.

L denotes items in the lie scale subscale.

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B

CHILDHOOD FEAR SCALE-REVISED

Mons; "Everybody is scared of some things. I'm going to be asking you Some
questions to ﬁnd out what feels scary to you." ‘

HOW SCARED DO YOU FEEL ABOUT:

 

1.C A dog barking at you?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O

 

2.S Someone asking you if they can touch your private parts?

 

Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 0
3. Getting into a ﬁght when you are playing with friends?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared .
2 1 0

 

4.B Being left at home with a babysitter?

Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 0

 

5.C Getting a shot?

Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O

 

48

49

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.B Someone you know giving you a hug?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 0
7F Falling off your bike?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
8.B Holding hands with someone you know?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 l O
9.8 Someone asking if they could take pictures of you with no clothes on?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
10. Someone helping you to get dressed?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 l O
11. Letting a doctor look at your private parts if you were hurt?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 0
12C The dark at night?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared

2 1 0

 

50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l3.B Someone you know putting their arm around your shoulder?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 l O
14.S Someone asking you to touch their private parts?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 0
15. One of you parents helping you take a bath?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 l O
l6.S Someone showing you their private parts?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
17. Someone you don't know talking to you?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 l 0
18.B Someone helping you get up if you fall down?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
19. Going on an airplane ride?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O

 

51

 

 

 

 

 

 

20.C Getting lost in a store?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
21 .8 Sitting on the lap of someone you know?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
22.S Someone showing you pictures of people with no clothes on?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
23. Someone you know giving you a kiss?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O
24.C Thunderstorms?
Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 0
25.B Someone you know rubbing your back?

Very Scared A Little Scared Not Scared
2 1 O

 

S denotes items in the sexual abuse factor.
B denotes items in the benign situations.
C denotes items in the common fear factor.

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX C

WHAT IF SITUATION TEST (WIST)
MSU VERSION

Code #

Interviewer Initials
lntemiewer;

O.K. (child's name), I am going to show you some pictures and read you some stories about
the people in the pictures.

SIQRLQNE

Let's pretend you were riding your bike and fell off and hurt your private parts.
When you went home, you told your parents what happened and they wanted to look at
your private parts.
1. Would it be OK. for your parents to look at your private parts?
(Please CIRCLE one response)
YES..go to question 2a.

NO...go to question 2b.

DK...go to next vignette.

2a. Why would that be OK?

2b. Why wouldn't that be OK?

52

53

PRAISE CHILD FOR HIS/HER EFFORT AND/OR COOPERATION, NQIEQR
W. For example, "You're thinking so hard, (child's name); that's
great!" Or "It's really great the way you're listening so carefully to my questions, (child's
name)!

SIQRXMQ

Let's pretend a neighbor who is a big person, said to you, "Hey (child's name), let's
play a real fun game! You take off all your clothes and I'll take pictures of your private
parts with my camera!"

1. Would it be OK. for your neighbor to take pictures of your private parts?
(Please CIRCLE one response)
YES..go to question 2a.

NO...go to question 2b.

DK...go to question 3.

2a. Why would that be O.K.?

2b. Why wouldn't that be O.K.?

3. If your neighbor asked you to do that, what would you say to them or what would
you do?

W1: Aﬁmsglmign encourage the child to generate more solutions by
saying, "O.K. That's something you could try. Anything else?" NOTE BENE: Take care to

respond with the same enthusiasm and the same words to W the child offers]

W: If a child begins to perseverate, after three enumerations, stop child and say,
"OK. (name of child), that's kind of like what you thought of doing before. (Explain how
three previous responses are alike). The idea here is to think of all the diﬂerem things you
could say or do. What's something different you would say or do?"]

54

W3: If a child says "IDK," prompt by asking, "How would you talk to your
neighbor, or how would you act if they wanted to take pictures of your private parts?"]

[N52 I E #4: Number every response]

SAY Responses DO Responses

 

 

 

 

 

 

4a. If child has AW:

"So far you said that you would say to your neighbor (repeat all SAY responses). What else
would you tell your neighbor?" OR "How would you talk to your neighbor?"

If child has W:

"Try to think really hard now. What would you say to your neighbor?" OR "What would
you tell your neighbor?" OR "How would you talk to your neighbor?"

Prompted SAY Responses

1.

 

2.

 

 

 

55
4b. If child has WES:

"Now before you told me that if your neighbor tried to take pictures of your private parts,
you would (repeat all DO responses). What else would you do?" OR "You know, how
would you act if your neighbor asked to take pictures of your private parts?"

If child has W:

"Try to think really hard. What would you do if your neighbor tried to take pictures of your
private parts?" OR "You know, how would you act if your neighbor asked to take pictures
of your private parts?"

Prompted DO Responses

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

5a. Now I'm going to ask you a different kind of question. Let's pretend your neighbor
wanted to take pictures of your private parts, AND THEY ASKED YOU TO KEEP IT A
SECRET. Some kids would keep that a secret, but other kids would tell somebody. Which
kid is more like you?

(Please CIRCLE one response)
TELL SOMEBODY ....... go to question 5b, then to question 6.

KEEP IT A SECRET....go to question So, then to next story.
DK .................. go to next story.

5b. Why would you tell somebody?

So. Why would you keep it a secret?

56
IF CHILD WOULD TELL SOMEBODY, ASK QUESTIONS 6 AND 7.

6. Who would you tell?
W: Prompt oachjime child stops answering by asking "Anybody else?]

INQI E #2: Number responses]

7. What would you say to (name of ﬁrst person listed above)?
[NOTE If child does not respond, rephrase the question by asking, "How would you let

(person(s) name above) know what happened to you?" If child still does not respond
and/or seems uncomfortable, offer to let child whisper what he/she would say in your ear]

PRAISE CHILD FOR HIS/HER EFFORT AN D/OR COOPERATION, NQEEQR
W. For example, "You're thinking so hard, (child's name); that's
great!" Or "It's really great the way you're listening so carefully to my questions, (child's
name)!

SIDRLIHBEE

Let's pretend you had a babysitter and they said to you, "(name of child), I'll let you
stay up late to watch your favorite TV show if X QLJ touch MY private parts for a little
while.”

1. Would it be OK. for your babysitter to ask you to touch her private parts?
(Please CIRCLE one response)
YES..go to question 2a.

NO...go to question 2b.

DK...go to question 3.

2a. Why would that be O.K.?

2b. Why wouldn't that be O.K.?

57

3. If your babysitter asked you to do that, what would you say to her or what would
you do?

W: W encourage the child to generate more solutions by
saying, "O.K. That's something you could try. Anything else?" NOTE BENE: Take care to

respond with the same enthusiasm and the same words to msolyoon the child offers]

W: If a child begins to perseverate, after three enumerations, stop child and say,
"OK. (name of child), that's kind of like what you thought of doing before. (Explain how
three previous responses are alike). The idea here is to think of all the diﬁorom things you
could say or do. What's something different you would say or do?"]

W3: If a child says "IDK," prompt by asking, "How would you talk to your
babysitter, or how would you act if she wanted you to touch ho: private parts?"]

INQ I E #4: Number every response]

SAY Responses DO Responses

 

 

 

 

 

 

4a. If child has WES:
"So far you said that you would say to your babysitter (repeat all SAY responses). What
else would you tell your babysitter?" OR "How would you talk to your babysitter?"

58
If child has W2

"Try to think really hard now. What would you say to your babysitter?" OR "What would
you tell your babysitter?" OR "How would you talk to your babysitter?"

Prompted SAY Responses

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

4b. If child has WES:

"Now before you told me that if your babysitter asked you to touch her private parts, you
would (repeat all DO responses). What else would you do?" OR "You know, how would
you got if your babysitter wanted to touch private parts?"

If child has WES:

"Try to think really hard. What would you do if your babysitter asked you to touch her
private parts?" OR "You know, how would you got if your babysitter asked to touch private

parts?"
Prompted DO Responses

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

5a. Now I'm going to ask you a different kind of question. Let's pretend your babysitter
asked you to touch her private parts, AND THEY ASKED YOU TO KEEP IT A SECRET.
Some kids would keep that a secret, but other kids would tell somebody. Which kid is

more like you?

59
(Please CIRCLE one response)

TELL SOMEBODY ....... go to question 5b, then to question 6.
KEEP IT A SECRET....go to question 5c, then to next story.
DK .................. go to next story.

5b. Why would you tell somebody?
5c. Why would you keep it a secret?
IF CHILD WOULD TELL SOMEBODY, ASK QUESTIONS 6 AND 7.

6. Who would you tell?

W: Prompt oaohtimo child stops answering by asking "Anybody else?]
W: Number responses]

7. What would you say to (name of ﬁrst person listed above)?

[NQEEz If child does not respond, rephrase the question by asking, "How would you let
(person(s) name above) know what happened to you?" If child still does not respond
and/or seems uncomfortable, offer to let child whisper what he/she would say in your ear.]

PRAISE CHILD FOR HIS/HER EFFORT AND/OR COOPERATION, NQLEQR
W. For example, "You're thinking so hard, (child's name); that's
great!" Or "It's really great the way you're listening so carefully to my questions, (child's
name)! 1

STORIEQUR

Let's pretend you were playing at the park and a man you like said to you, "Hey,
(name of child), I'll buy you an ice cream cone if you take off your pants and let me touch
your private parts."

1. Would it be OK. for that man to ask you to take off your pants so he could touch
your private parts?

(Please CIRCLE one response)

YES..go to question 2a.

NO...go to question 2b.

DK... go to question 3.

60
23. Why would that be O.K.?

2b. Why wouldn't that be O.K.?

3. If the man in the park asked you to do that, what would you say to him or what
would you do?

[IiQIEjih Aﬁomyemsolution encourage the child to generate more solutions by
saying, "O.K. That's something you could try. Anything else?" NOTE BENE: Take care to
respond with the same enthusiasm and the same words to eyerysgﬂutioo the child offers]

W: If a child begins to perseverate, after three enumerations, stop child and say,
"OK. (name of child), that's kind of like what you thought of doing before. (Explain how
three previous responses are alike). The idea here is to think of all the different things you
could say or do. What's something different you would say or do?"]

W: If a Child says "IDK," prompt by asking, "How would you talk to the man,
or how would you act if he wanted to touch your private parts?"]

W: Number every response]

SAY Responses DO Responses

 

 

 

 

 

 

4a. If child has W2
"So far you said that you would say to the man in the park (repeat all SAY responses).

What else would you tell him?" OR "How would you talk to the man in the park?"

If child has W:

61

"Try to think really hard now. What would you say to that man in the park?" OR "What
would you tell him?" OR "How would you talk to the man in the park?"

Prompted SAY Responses

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

4b. If child has W:

"Now before you told me that if that man in the park asked to touch your private parts, you
would (repeat all DO responses). What else would you do?" OR "You know, how would
you not if that man in the park asked to touch your private parts?"

If child has W:

"Try to think really hard. What would you do if that man in the park asked to touch your
private parts?" OR "You know, how would you not if that man in the park asked to touch
your private parts?"

Prompted DO Responses

1.

 

2.

 

3.

 

4.

 

5a. Now I'm going to ask you a different kind of question. Let's pretend that man in the
park wanted to touch your private parts, AND THEY ASKED YOU TO KEEP IT A
SECRET. Some kids would keep that a secret, but other kids would tell somebody. Which
kid is more like you?

62
(Please CIRCLE one response)

TELL SOMEBODY ....... go to question 5b, then to question 6.

KEEP IT A SECRET....go to question So, then to next story.
DK .................. go to next story.

5b. Why would you tell somebody?

5c. Why would you keep it a secret?

IF CHILD WOULD TELL SOMEBODY, ASK QUESTIONS 6 AND 7.
6. Who would you tell?
W1: Prompt oaolLtiJno child stops answering by asking "Anybody else?]

W: Number responses]

7. What would you say to (name of ﬁrst person listed above)?

[NQIEz If child does not respond, rephrase the question by asking, "wa would you let
(person(s) name above) know what happened to you?" If child still does not respond
and/or seems uncomfortable, offer to let child whisper what he/she would say in your ear.]

PRAISE CHILD FOR HIS/HER EFFORT AN D/OR COOPERATION, MEQR
W. For example, "You're thinking so hard, (child's name); that's
great!" Or "It's really great the way you're listening so carefully to my questions, (child's
name)!

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX D

WHAT IF SITUATION TEST (WIST) SCORING GUIDELINES
Storylz For the positive touch story the following scoring system will be used:

Question I: WOULD IT BE O.K. FOR YOUR PARENTS TO LOOK AT YOUR PP?
(1 Column)

2 = YES 1 = NO 3 = I Don't Know

1 = BC child is hurt

so they can help you

so they can put medicine on

they need to if you are hurt

it would hurt more it you didn't let them

2 = BC they are your parents

- she is my mom
- BC you have to let parents do that

- BC they are nice
- BC I love them
- I know them

3 = Nonsense answers

4 = I don't know

9 = This question not asked

***NOTE: IF THE CHILD GIVES A RESPONSE WHERE ASPECTS OF BOTH
CATEGORIES 1 AND 2 CAN BE APPLIED RECORD ONLY THE FIRST PART OF
THE MULTIPLE RESPONSE ANSWER. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE CHILD SAYS
"BECAUSE THEY NEED TO HELP ME AND BESIDES IT IS O.K. BECAUSE THEY
ARE MY PARENTS," THIS ANSWER WOULD BE CODES AS A I. TAKE THE
FIRST ANSWER THE CHILD GIVES.

Question 2b: WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE OK.

63

64

1 = Child gives refusal to be touched

- I don't like them to touch

- I hate that

- I said no

- they can't touch my pp

- nobody but me can touch my pp
- only doctors can

2 = Parents touching would cause problems
- it will hurt more if they look at them

- they don't know which way to touch it
- BC they might get more interested in my pp and

start touching them
3 = Nonsense answers
4 = I don't know
9 = Question not asked

***NOTE: IF THE CHILD GIVES A RESPONSE WHERE ASPECTS OF BOTH
CATEGORIES 1 AND 2 CAN BE APPLIED, CODE ONLY THE FIRST PART OF THE
RESPONSE. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE CHILD SAYS "I SAID NO AND BESIDES
THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING," THIS ANSWER WOULD BE
CODED AS A 1. CODE ONLY THE FIRST ANSWER GIVEN.

STORIES 2, 3, AND 4 OF THE WIST ARE SCORED THE SAME. THE SCORING
PROCEDURES FOR THESE STORES ARE AS FOLLOWS:

Question I: WOULD IT BE O.K. FOR ............

1 = YES 2 = NO 3 = I DON'T KNOW
Question 2a: WHY WOULD THAT BE O.K.?

1 = Child feels they should listen to the authority ﬁgure.

- BC she wants me to do that
- BC she is the babysitter

65

Child focuses on the social position, the familiarity of the authority

- BC he is a ﬁiend
- BC I love my babysitter/neighbor
- BC if it is someone you know it is OK

Child feels the necessity of being obedient

- BC she wants me to do that
- She said only for a little while
- She asked me to

Child perceives positive by giving into the bribe

- I like ice cream/I like to have my picture taken
- BC I like to watch TV/stay up late

Child wants to participate

- It will be fun
- I want to touch pp

- BC I like doing that, touching pp

Nonsense answers/unclear answers/needs further prompting,
clariﬁcation

- They want to take a bath
"1 don't know"

If question not asked

Question 2b: WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE OK.

The child's response relates the action of the story with some rule
(e.g., the rule that a particular behavior is bad)

- It is bad to touch pp

- Those are bad kinds of pictures

- Not supposed to do that (take pictures)

- That is not good to do/ Nobody has to touch anybody's pp
- BC I'm the boss of my pp

66

The child responds by saying the consequences of particular
behaviors would be bad

- It's not fun/It's gross

- I don't like when that happens

- That would hurt

- I don't know what would happen
Child's answer reﬂects a trait of the abuser

- He is mean/tn'cky/stupid/bad
Responses relates to child's concept of authority

- Only parents can do that

- You should ask your parents

- BC my mom said so

- My parents would not let me

- He is a stranger

- I'm the boss of my pp and my neighbor isn't allowed
to do that

Child refuses to participate verbally or behaviorally

- I would hit him/slap him
- I'd run away

- I'd just go to bed

- I'd say no

Child is embarrassed

- They would see my body
- Cuz people would laugh
- Cuz others would see the pp

Nonsense answers/unclear answers/vague

- I would spread magic

- I don't want to, Don't want her to do that
I don't know
If child not asked this question

67

QUESTION 3a and 4a: WHAT WOULD YOU SAY? AN YMORE SAY RESPONSES?
(9 Columns)
Prior to coding the content of the SAY response, the coder should ﬁrst go through all of the
SAY and DO responses for questions 3a, 3b, 4a, and 4b to make sure the responses
recorded under the SAY and DO columns are actual SAY and DO responses. If you ﬁnd a
DO response recorded as a SAY in question, simply cross out the DO response and write
the response in the DO columns. Make sure you have completed this procedure for all of
questions 3 and 4 before you proceed to code the content categories for each response. For
example, if under the SAY column in question 3a the child responds "I would tell," you
would cross this out and rewrite it under the DO column. When you write the response
under the new column make sure you notice the number next to it. That is, in the example
above if this was the child's third response overall, but the ﬁrst SAY response, you would
now code this as the third DO response.

For each of the SAY response given for questions 3a and 4a the following categories will be
used to score the solution content. Code each of the SAY responses in the order given,
starting with question 3a and then followed by the SAY responses given in question 4a. If
the child gives more than 9 total SAY responses, code only the ﬁrst nine. If the child gives
only three responses code the three responses accordingly and then code the remaining six
columns as 99.

*** NOTE: If the child gives 2 or more SAY responses in one sentence, code the response
as 2 separate statements. For example, if the child says "I would say that is bad to do, but
then I would say lets go ask my parents if I can do tha " this would be coded as a 6.3
(bribe/give a reason) and a 3.3 (help seeking).

*** NOTE: IF the child gives a multiple answer response and part of the answer is a
SAY response and part of it is a DO response, DO NOT break this apart. Code this type of
response under whether the ﬁrst part of the answer is a SAY or a DO and code the rest of
the response under the same column.

A DEFINITION OF EACH OF THE CONTENT CODES ALONG WITH
PROTOTYPICAL EXAMPLES FOLLOWS:

IRRELEVAN T RESPONSES (1)

Responses which do not in any perceivable way relate to the situation at hand. Unrealistic
solutions which could not be enacted. Nonsensical answers, "I don't know" responses, or
responses in which the interviewer did not obtain sufﬁcient detail to accurately classify the
responses elsewhere are coded under this category.

68

1.1) Nonsense solutions, irrelevant comment, "I don't know" responses
- Get cold
- Leave for Africa
- I don't know
- I'm not sure
- Beats me
- Maybe
- I would sting him with a bee
- Lock the door

1.2) Vague solutions which were not clariﬁed by the interviewer.
- I would protect myself

ASSERTIVE (2)

Assertive strategies are nonaggressive statements, acts, or questions used to assert or defend
subjects rights: request cessation of the other party's behavior: express nonviolent threats or
warning: or express disagreement with the other party's perceptions or motives.

2.1) Assertion of subjects rights
- Tell her I don't have to touch pp
- Say "My parent told me I don't have to do that"
- Say you can't make me

2.2) Assertion of subject's intentions not to comply
- I would say no
- No way Jose
- I don't want to touch your pp/stay up late/take off my clothes
- I wouldn't do it

2.3) Other directed commands
- Tell her to stop that
- Tell her to quit bugging me
- Tell her to leave me alone
- Neighbor, you can't do that
- I don't like that
- That's wrong/gross

69

(***NOTE: If the child speciﬁcally indicates she would say "I wish you'd stop" this is
coded as assertive (2.3) since the child is verbalizing her request for the behavior to stop;
but if the child only silently wishes or hopes it will stop, this is simply an irrelevant feeling
and coded as 1.1).

2.4) Stated nonviolent threats or gestures that do not escalate the situation i.e.,
threats or gestures that probably will not cause a verbal or physical ﬁght.

- "Say I will tell"

- "Say 'I won't like you anymore if you do that

- "Say I'm going to tell my mom"

- "Say 'If you do that I will tell'"

- "I'll tell"
*** NOTE: There are a number of responses which if the child threatens to take the
described action are coded under this category. If the child actually takes the action, the
response is coded elsewhere. For example, if the child says "I'm going to call the police"
this is coded as an assertive nonviolent threat. However, if the child says "Call the police
and the interviewer conﬁrms that the child is proposing to take this action, then this
response is categories as falling into another category (help-seeking).

HELP-SEEKING (3)

Solutions in which the subject involves someone else in solving the problem are coded as
help-seeking. This can take the form of telling an adult or peer aﬁer the episode has ended,
soliciting immediate aid from an adult or peer, or asking an adult for advice on how to cope
with the problem when it arises. ~

3.1) Telling another person
- "Tell"/”Go Tell”
- "Tell my mom"
- "Call the police"
- "Go home and tell my mom"
- "Run and tell"

3.2) Solicitation of aid
- "Ask my brother to help me"
- "Have my mom tell the man in the park he can't do that"
- "I would get help"/"I would scream for help"
- "Go to my sister"

70

3.3) Solicitation of third party advice

- "Ask my mom it I can"
- "I would ask my mom if I could touch pp and if she said
yes then I would"

NONCONFRONTATIONAL (4)

Strategies are coded as nonconfrontational if the subject meets his or her own needs
immediately and avoids confrontation, argument, or physical ﬁght.

4.1) Subject leaves the scene

- "I would leave"

- "Go home"

- "Go to my room"

- "Run away"

- "Go to a different park"

- "Play on the swings" (story 4)

AGGRESSIVE (5)

Responses which express physical hostile infringements on another person or possession:
verbal insults; threat to do physical harm: or the use of intimidation constitute aggressive
solutions. .

5.1) Direct physical harm to person or possessions

- "Hit him"
- "Smash his camera"

5.2) Third party physical assault

- "Get my buddies to beat him up"
5.3) Verbal aggression which does escalate the situation, e.g., could cause a verbal or
physical ﬁght

- "Call him names"

- "You're mean"

- "I'm going to hurt you if you try that"

- "Your gross"

- "Get my baseball bat"

71

BRIBE/FINAGLE/GIVE A REASON (6)

Strategies in which the subject resists participation by enticing or tricking the perpetrator
into a different activity, or by providing a reason why she cannot engage in the suggested
activity (i.e., the child makes excuse).

6.1) Bribe
- "I will give you $5 not to do that"

6.2) Make a deal/give a reason/restructure

- "Let's play instead"

- "Let's watch TV instead"

- "Let's do that later"

- "You take off your clothes"

6.3) Invoke a rule or authorities command

- "Say 'My parents said I don't have to touch pp'"
- "My parents said never ever touch pp"

- "Say 'Ice cream is bad for you'"

- "Say 'I can't touch pp'"

(*** NOTE: In the last couple of examples, the child implies the use of a rule, but does not
explicitly say what the rule is. These responses should still be coded as 6.3 since the use of
a rule is implied.)

6.4) Make excuses

- "I can't have ice cream before dinner"
- "I can't, I have to go home now"
- "My mom doesn't allow me to watch TV"
6.5) Distraction
- "They could must make paper instead, it is better than touching pp"

PASSIVE RESISTANCE (7)

Solutions in which the subject does not comply, or actively resists are coded as passive
resistance.

72

7.1) Ignore
- "I would just keep watching TV"
- "I would just ignore the man"

7.2) Passivity
- "I wouldn't do anything"
- "Keep is a secret"

MANIPULATE AFFECT (8)

Strategies that center on the manipulation of affect are ones in which the subject states that
she would either change her emotional state or attempt to change the emotional state of the
perpetrator. In addition, solutions in which the subject attempts to deter the perpetrator by
threatening to become emotionally upset fall under this category.
8.1) Manipulate own affect

- I would cry

- I would be real mad/I would be mad at him

- Act scared/mad

- Act sad

- Make a mad face at him

- Stomp my feet at him

- Talk sternly/Y ell at him

8.2) Manipulate perpetrator's emotions
- "I would make him feel bad that he wanted to take ’
pictures of my pp"

COMPLIANCE (9)

Solutions in this category are not resistance strategies. Instead they are behaviors or
statements which indicate the child would give up the goal of resistance and comply with
the perpetrators request.

9.1) Active compliance
- I would take off my clothes
- I would do it
- I would say OK/Just this once
- I would just touch pp for a little while

73

QUESTION 3b AND 4b: WHAT WOULD YOU DO? ANYMORE DO RESPONSES

For each of the DO responses given for questions 3b and 4b the previous 9 solution
categories will be used again. code each of the DO responses in the order given, starting
with question 3b and followed by the DO responses in question‘4b. If the child gives more
than 9 DO responses only code the ﬁrst 9. If the child only gives 3 responses, code the
remaining 6 columns as 9.9

If the child gives 2 or more DO responses in one statement code each of the DO responses
separately. For example, if the child says "If I go ask my mom and she let me touch the pp
I would do it, but I would walk away" would be coded as a 3.3 (help seeking) and 4.1
(nonconfrontational).

Question 5a: WOULD YOU TELL OR KEEP THIS A SECRET?
2 = Tell somebody

I = Keep it a secret

O = Don't know

Question 5b: WHY WOULD YOU TELL SOMEBODY?

l = So someone can help/so behavior will cease

- So she won't babysit again

- BC they could help me

- You don't want him to do that again

- To get help

- So my friend could beat him up

- So I feel safe/BC I feel safth wouldn't be safe to
keep secret

2 = BC the act was bad or the secret is bad
- that is a bad secret
- it is bad to touch pp/ to take pictures
- that was mean what happened
- I don't like taking off my clothes
- BC she is bad
- I don't want people to do that
- BC that is wrong/shouldn't

74

3 = BC secrets are bad or I don't like secrets

4

BC parents have stressed the need to tell BC it is right to tell

- BC I want to

- BC my parents want me to tell

- BC Mom said you have to tell secrets
- It is important to tell your mom

- I like to tell

- I always tell

- BC I don't want to keep that a secret
- You shouldn't keep that a secret

5 = Nonsense answers/ uncodeable answers/ vague
6 = I don't know
9 = If this question is not asked
Question 5c: WHY WOULD YOU KEEP IT A SECRET?
1 = Children have to listen to authority
- she is the babysitter
- BC the neighbor said to keep it a secret and you should listen to him
- He is big and you have to listen to him
2 = Secrets are good - Secrets should not be told
- BC secrets mean not to tell anybody
- You don't tell secrets
- I love secrets
3 = Child doesn't want to tell for fear or concern of something
- I don't want anyone to know because they would be angry
- cuz my mom would spank me if she found out
Nonsense answers/ uncodeable answers

I don't know
If this question not asked

soc/:4:-
II

75

CODE QUESTIONS 6 AND 7 ONLY IF THE CHILD SAID THEY WOULD TELL
SOMEBODY FOR QUESTION 5a. IF THE CHILD SAID THEY WOULD KEEP IT A
SECRET FOR QUESTION 5a THE REMAINING COLUMNS SHOULD BE CODED
AS 9's.

Question 6a: WHO WOULD YOU TELL?

nonsense/uncodeable/I don't know

1 = parent(s) (including mom or dad)

2 = relative (cousin, aunt, grandma)

3 = friend

4 = teacher

5 = police

6 = other (friend's parents, minister, unspeciﬁed other)

*** NOTE: Code the ﬁrst ﬁve people the child says. If the child only says "dad," for
example, code it as a 1 and code the remaining four columns as 9's. If the child says
"parents" code this twice as a 1 and 1. Grandparents would also be coded twice, 2 and 2.

** FOR THIS COUNT HOW MANY SEPARATE PEOPLE THE CHILD GIVES. IF
THE CHILD SAYS PARENTS THIS WOULD COUNT AS TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE
S/I-IE WOULD TELL. POLICE COUNTS AS ONE. THE CODER WOULD SIMPLY
FILL IN A FIGURE FROM 0 TO 9 DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THE
CHILD WOULD TELL IF TI-HS HAPPENED TO THEM.

Question 7: WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO ...?

2 = Informative disclosure that describes: a) who the abuser was, AND b) what
occurred. (On the last story the abuser is described as "a man you like," so responses that
are vague in describing the identity of the abuser are acceptable, as long as s/he did not
misidentify the abuser as a woman.)
- My uncle asked me to take off my clothes
so he could take pictures of my pp.
- The babysitter wanted me to touch her pp.

1 = A partial informative disclosure that includes either the abuser or the situation, BUT
NOT BOTH. Only one aspect of the situation is described accurately.
- A man wanted to touch my pp.

- Someone wanted to take pictures of my pp.
- The babysitter did something bad

76

0 = Uninformative disclosure. The child does not identify the abuser or describe the
situation or the child misidentiﬁes the abuser and describes the situation inaccurately.
None of the situation is relayed accurately.

- Let’s get a new babysitter.
- I don't want to go to the park.

APPENDIX E

APPENDIX E

APPREHENSION SCALE

W I'm going to be asking you some questions are writing down what
you tell me. This isn't a test at all. There are no right or wrong answers. I just want to
know what you think. Any questions that you don't want to answer you don't have to.
Okay?

Eirst; Review deﬁnition of private parts and secrets.

Seoond: Everybody feels scared or worried sometimes. We are going to talk about some
things that might worry or scare you, but ﬁrst I'm going to tell you about

something that scares me, and when I'm ﬁnished you can tell me about yourself. One thing
that I'm scared of is bees. I worry that a bee will sting me and that it will hurt, and I don't
like to be hurt. So when I'm on a picnic with my friends or family, I stay away from bees.
And if a bee is at the picnic table, even if I'm hungry, I'll wait for the bee to ﬂy away before
I sit down to eat my lunch.

(If child doesn't spontaneously talk about their fears concerning bees then ask 1a., otherwise
just ask the questions that the child doesn't spontaneously answer. Because this question is
only for practice, don't worry about writing down every detail concerning the child's
answers).

1. Do you ever feel scared or worried about bees? (If child says "no," then ask: Do
you ever feel scared or worried about another kind of bug or even an animal?)

Never Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time

a. When do you feel scared or worried about bees?

b. What is it about bees that makes you scared?

(What are you worried about happening with a bee?)

c. Does feeling scared or worried ever stop you from doing something that you
want to do, the way that I wouldn't eat my lunch until the bee was gone.
How often?
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time

77

78
(I. Do you ever worry about bees, even when they are not around?

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
low: Children will be asked whether they feel scared or worry about the items
that follow. If children do feel scared or worried, then they will be asked questions a.
through d. -

1. Do you ever feel scared or worry about noighbots?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or worried about neighbom?

B. What is it about neighbors that makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

 

SUMIVIARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.

 

 

 

YES NO
1)
Anything else? (only list two more activities)
2)
3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask
"how often?" for the ﬁrst two activities.

79

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i. e, focus of fear) when you

are not around (Wm), like (gixean
example, e. g., when you are at home with your parents).

YES NO
If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time

(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

 

Any other time?

2)

 

3)

 

1. Do you ever feel scared or worry about habyﬂttom?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or wom'ed about habysiﬂozs?

80
B. What is it about babysjﬁom that makes you scared

(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

 

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.

 

 

YES NO
1)
Anything else? (only list two more activities)
2)
3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask "how often?"
for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i. e, focus of fear) when you

are not around (ﬂuhilissxpressionofthefeamnmny) like (gixean
example, e. g, when you are at home with your parents).

YES NO

 

81
If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

 

 

 

 

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
When do you worry or feel scared?
1)
Any other time?
2)
3)
3. Do you ever feel scared or worry about WW
gmndmanngmndna)?
YES NO

(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)
A. When do you feel scared or worried about Lelaﬁyes?

B. What is it about [ohms that makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.
YES NO
1)

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)
2)

 

3)

 

 

82
If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask "how often?"

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i. 6., focus of fear) when you

are not around (WWW) like (gixean
example e. g., when you are at home with your parents).

YES NO

If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

 

Any other time?
2)

3)

 

83
4. Do you ever feel scared or worry about strangers?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or worried about otmngem?

B. What is it about amngezs that makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

 

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.

YES NO
1)

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)

2)

 

3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask "how often?"
for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you ever worry or feel scared about that (i. 6., focus of fear) when you are

not around (WWW) like (giyean.
example, e. g, when you are at home with your parents).

84
YES NO

If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

 

Any other time?

2)

 

3)
5. Do you ever feel scared or worry about Moses?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or worried about hugyopkisses?

B. What is it about hugsoLkims that makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

 

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.

YES NO

 

85
1)

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)

2)

 

3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them ﬁom doing something(s) then ask "how often?"
for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i.e., focus of fear) when you

are not around (WWW), like (giman
example, e.g., when you are at home with your parents). .

YES NO
If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

Any other time?

86
2)

 

3)

 

6. Do you ever feel scared or worry about leayingyouphouse?

YES NO 1
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or worried about leayingyouphouse?

B. What is it about leayingyouphouse that makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

 

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.

YES NO

1)

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)

2)

 

3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask "how often?"
for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

87

Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i. e., focus of fear) when you

are not around (theehldsexmsimfﬂmfeammoru), like (gi_e_an
example, e. g. when you are at home with your parents).

YES NO
If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

Any other time?

2)

 

3)

 

7. Do you ever feel scared or worry about goiugjosehooj?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or worried about goingjosehool?

B. What is it about goingjosohool that makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

 

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

88

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do?

YES NO

1)

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)

2)

 

3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask
"how often?" for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i.e., focus of fear) when you are not
around (WWW), like (Wale. age when you

are at home with your parents).
YES NO

If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

 

89

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

Any other time?

2)

 

3)

 

8. Do you ever feel scared or worry about lettmgadoetoplookat
W?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or wormed about lettingﬂoejoplookm
W?

B. What 18 it about letting_a_doe_o:_look_at
WW that makes you scared?

(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.
YES NO
1)

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)

2)

 

3)

 

 

90
If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask "how often?"

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i.e., focus of fear) when you
are not around (mechildlaexnressionoftheiemmony), like (gixeanexample. e.g-,

when you are at home with your parents).
YES NO
If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

 

Any other time?
2)

3)

 

9. Do you ever feel scared or worry about someonoaeldngyoujﬂheyealtoueh
Wanna?

YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b. then ask a. and/or b.)
A. When do you feel scared or worried about WWW
W?

B. What is it about I11 ‘I 1,"

 

makes you scared? (What are you worried about happening with a ?)

SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears and child has
expressed him or herself completely. If there are any changes or additions to child's fear
then note them here and then resummarize. '

C. Does feeling scared or wom'ed about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.

 

 

 

YES NO
1)
Anything else? (only list two more activities)
2)
3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask "how oﬁen?"
for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

 

92
Activity 2.

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i.e., focus of fear) when you

are not around (theehildlsexpressionofthefemmorrx). like (gixeanexample. e-g-.

when you are at home with your parents).
YES NO
If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)

When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

 

Any other time?

2)

 

3)

10. Do you ever feel scared or worry about W
11211:?
YES NO
(If child doesn't offer a. and/or b., then ask a. and/or b.)

A. When do you feel scared or worried about WW
II . . | | ?

B. What is it about f 1 11 ‘1 I ‘
makes you scared?
(What are you worried about happening with a ?)

:1. that

 

93
SUMMARIZE a and b to ensure that you have understood child's fears.

C. Does feeling scared or worried about that every stop you from doing
something that you want to do.
YES NO
1) -

 

 

Anything else? (only list two more activities)

2)

 

3)

 

If child indicates that their fear stops them from doing something(s) then ask
"how often?" for the ﬁrst two activities.

Activity 1.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Activity 2.
Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time
(1) (2) (3) (4)
D. Do you every worry or feel scared about that (i.e., focus of fear) when you
are not around (thesiu’ld'eexpressionoﬂhefemny). like (gixeanexample. e.g.,

when you are at home with your parents).
YES NO

If child responds "yes" then ask "how often?"

94

Once in a While Sometimes A lot of the time All of the time

(1) (2)
When do you worry or feel scared?

1)

 

 

Any other time?

2)

 

3)

 

APPENDIX F

APPENDIX F

LETTER TO PRINCIPAL-
Dear ,

This upcoming school year, we are offering to teach a sexual abuse prevention
curriculum--at no cost--to second graders in the greater Lansing area. Over the past two
years, we assisted a number of preschool and day care centers in implementing a sexual
abuse prevention program. The children enjoyed the curriculum and, most importantly,
were able to learn prevention techniques. Parents and teachers were enthusiastic about the
project and felt it provided a valuable experience for the children.

We're sure that you know what a serious problem child sexual abuse has become in
our society. And it's not a problem that discriminates on the basis of gender, race, or
parent's income. For example, one is four girls and one in six boys will be sexually abused
before they reach age 18. Why are our children so vulnerable? Sexual abuse perpetrators
often state that they abuse children because children are helpless and can be easily
intimidated. It just isn't possible for a kind, caring adult to be with a child 24 hours a day.
We need to teach our children to recognize threatening situations, should they arise, and to
seek help. The sexual abuse prevention program is especially designed to do just this by
employing a range of techniques (books, discussion, activities, and role-play) to involve the
children and to teach them prevention skills. Parents are also encouraged to become
actively involved in discussing the curriculum with their children. We conduct an ongoing
evaluation of the program in order to make continual improvements in the curriculum.

The program will be offered this Fall and Winter. If you are interested in
participating or would like more detailed information, please leave a message at 353-8690
for Dr. Bogat or Karen Kiemel. Or, if your school district requires a written research
request, please send the necessary forms or guidelines to the following address:

Karen Kiemel

Dept. of Psychology Graduate Office
Psychology Research Building
Michigan State University

East Lansing, MI 48824

Sincerely,

95

 

APPENDIX G

APPENDIX G

PARENT LETTER

Dear Parents,

Our school is concemed about all types of personal safety that involve children. We
routinely teach children safety rules about ﬁre and crossing the street. This year we are
pleased to offer a sexual abuse prevention program for children. We believe it is important
to teach children to recognize threatening situations, should they arise, and to seek help.
This rs a personal safety program that teaches children "No, Go, Tell" message, it_is_not_a
aexeduoatloopmgzam. It does not provide any explicit information about human sexuality.

The program starts with an optional parent meeting. Parents get to learn more about
the problem of sexual abuse and how to talk about it with their children. There is also a
parent-child workbook that can be used to reinforce the message of the program at home.
The program for the children takes place in the classroom and involves ﬁve, thirty minute
presentations that include picture stories, discussion and role-plays.

We are presenting this program in cooperation with faculty and staff at Michigan
State University. During the last several years, they have offered a sexual abuse prevention
program throughout the greater Lansing area. Parents and teachers were enthusiastic about
the program and felt it provided a valuable experience for the children. We conduct an
ongoing evaluation of the prevention cun'icula in order to make continual improvements it
is. This is done by interviewing children before the beginning of the program and shortly
after the program is completed. At each of these times, the children will be individually
interviewed for approximately 30 minutes and will also answer several questions in their
classroom (also lasting 30 minutes). The interviews will be conducted by Karen Kiemel or
Tim Speth, or one of their trained assistants. Children will be asked if they want to answer
some questions about personal safety. They'll be told that there are no right or wrong
answers; we'd just like to know what they think. The questions ask children to identify
appropriate and inappropriate touch and to state what they would say and so in various
pretend situations. Some questions also ask children about their apprehension regarding
potentially dangerous and benign situations related to personal safety. Because the
prevention program is being evaluated, half of the children who have permission to
participate will receive the program ﬁrst, the other half will receive it after the testing is
completed (both groups of children will be tested at the same time--before and after the
program is ﬁrst presented). This procedure makes it possible to determine what children
already know about the topic, how much of what they know is correct, and how much they
learn from the program.

96

97

1.1111111.1o1.-1111.11-.‘ ‘-..‘1111“1'
WWW If you have questions about the
program, a parent meeting will be held to answer all of your concerns, at this
time you may view of copy of the curriculum. In addition, you may leave a message for Dr.
Bogat, Dr. McGrath, Karen Kiemel, or Tim Speth at 353-8690 and they'll return your call
and answer your questions. If you decide that you do not want your child to participate,
then an alternate activity will be provided for your child while the prevention program is
being taught.
Parent Permission Form
Sexual Abuse Prevention Program

1. I understand the evaluation process of the sexual abuse prevention program. I have

read the description of the project and I understand what my child's participation

will involve.

2. I understand my child's participation is optional and that my child must also give
his/her verbal permission.
3. I understand that either myself or my child may discontinue my child's participation

in the evaluation at any time without penalty and that my child will still have the
opportunity to participate in the program.

4. I understand that all results of the study will be kept in strict conﬁdence and all
responses of my son or daughter will remain anonymous except if my child reports
possible sexual abuse. If such a report occurs, Dr. Bogat will notify both myself and
the school immediately. Within these restrictions, the results of the study will be
made available to me at my request.

5. I understand that participation in the study does not guarantee additional beneﬁts to
my child or to me.

I hereby give my approval to allow my child to be involved in the sexual abuse prevention
program and to be interviewed about his/her knowledge of personal safety. I understand
that this information will be used as part of a research project being conducted by Dr. Anne
Bogat, Karen Kiemel, and Tim Speth at Michigan State University.

Name of Child Birthdate

 

Signature of Parent/Guardian
Date
* * * * * *PLEASE COMPLETE AND RETURN TO YOUR CHILD'S TEACHER * * * "' * * *

 

 

APPENDIX H

APPENDIX H

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Mean Item Scores on the CFS-R Factors

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest
Experimentala Controlb Experimentala Controlb
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (52)

Sexual Abuse 2.36 (.68) 2.39 (.70) 2.32 (.68) 2.38 (.67)
Factor
Benign Factor 1.14 (.37) 1.14 (.27) 1.13 (.27) 1.13 (.29)
Common Fear 1.51 (.42) 1.53 (.43) 1.40 (.39) ‘ 1.45 (.42)
Factor
311 = 54.
bn = 56.

98

Table 2 - Sum Scores on the CFS-R Factors

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest
Experimentala Controlb Experimentala Controlb
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (5112)

Sexual Abuse 11.37 (3.54) 11.89 (3.56) 11.20 (3.72) 11.73 (3.55)
Factor
Benign Factor 7.93 (2.59) 7.98 (1.90) 7.80 (1.97) 7.84 (2.08)
Common Fear 8.96 (2.49) 9.13 (2.59) 8.13 (2.28) 8.68 (2.51)
Factor
an = 54.
bn = 56.
Table 3 - Multivariate Analysis of Variance for the CF S-R Factors
Source E Hypoth. DF Error DF p
Fear 80.38 2 107 .00
Group By Fear .10 2 107 .91
Group By Fear By Time .05 2 107 .95
Fear By Time 2.12 2 107 .13

 

99

Table 4 - Analysis of Variance of the CF S-R Common Fear Factor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 30.55 108 .28 .
Group .07 1 .07 .25 .62
Within subjects
Within Cells 1 1.62 216 .05
Time .48 1 .48 7.78 .01
Group by Time .01 l .01 .17 .68
Table 5 - Analysis of Variance of the CFS-R Benign Fear Factor
SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 16.43 108 .15
Group .00 1 .00 .00 .96
Within subjects
Within Cells 3.18 108 .03
Time .01 1 .01 0.32 .57
Group by Time .00 1 .00 .01 .90

 

100

Table 6 - Analysis of Variance of the CFS-R Sexual Abuse Fear Factor

 

 

 

SS DF F Sig of F
Between subjects

Within Cells 90.73 108

Group .12 1 .14 .71

Within subjects

Within Cells 10.26 108

Time .05 1 .50 .48
Group by Time .01 1 .13 .72

 

Table 7 - Mean Item Scores for Sexual Abuse and Common Fear Based on Gender

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest
Experimental Control Experimental Control
M (312)11 M (512)11 M (312m M (SIDn
ﬁrm
Sexual 2.24(0.68) 23 2.12 (0.75) 27 2.10 (0.70) 23 2.04 (0.71) 27

Abuse Factor

 

Common 1.33 (0.36) 23 1.35 (0.34) 27 1.30 (0.43) 23 1.35 (0.37) 27
Fear Factor

Girls

Sexual 2.45 (0.67) 31 2.64 (0.55) 29 2.48 (0.64) 31 2.68 (0.48) 29

Abuse Factor

Common
Fear Factor

1.63 (0.42) 31

1.69 (0.45) 29

1.47 (0.34) 31

1.53 (0.45) 29

 

101

Table 8 - Sum Scores for Sexual Abuse and Common Fear Factor Based on Gender

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest

Experimental Control Experimental Control

M (812)11 M (sum M (312)11 M (312)11
Box:
Sexual 10.48 (3.17) 23 10.48 (3.84) 27 10.09 (3.22) 23 10.00 (3.74) 27
Abuse Factor
Common 8.00 (2.15) 23 8.07 (2.02) 27 7.48 (2.54) 23 8.11 (2.22) 27
Fear Factor
Girls
Sexual 12.03 (3.69) 31 13.21 (2.73) 29 12.03 (3.89) 31 13.34 (2.48) 29
Abuse Factor
Common 9.68 (2.51) 31 10.10 (2.70) 29 8.61 (1.98) 31 _ 9.21 (2.68) 29
Fear Factor

 

102

Table 9 - MANOVA of the Sexual Abuse and Common Fear Factor by Gender

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects

Within Cells 65.11 106 .61
Group .30 1 .30 .49 .48
Sex 12.80 1 12.80 20.84 .00
Group by Sex .69 1 .69 1.13 .29

Within subjects
Within Cells 41.06 106 .39
Fear 85.34 1 85.34 220.33 .00
Group by Fear .00 1 .00 .01 .94
Sex by Fear 1.00 1 1.00 2.57 .11
Group by Sex .41 1 .41 1.07 .30
by Fear

Within subjects
Within Cells 10.87 106 .10
Time .42 l .42 4.05 .05
Group by Time .03 1 .03 .25 .62
Sex by Time .00 1 .00 .00 .95
Group by Sex .01 1 .01 .10 .75
by Time

Within subjects
Within Cells 5.47 106 .05
Fear by Time .07 1 .07 1.34 .25
Group by Fear by Time .00 1 .00 .05 .82
Sex by Fear by Time .59 1 .59 11.47 .00
Group by Sex .00 l .00 .01 .91
by Fear by Time

 

103

Table 10 - Analysis of Variance of the Common Fear Factor by Gender

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects

Within Cells 27.19 106 .26‘

Group . 12 1 . 12 .49 .49
Sex 3.33 l 3.33 12.98 .00
Group by Sex .02 1 .02 .07 .79

Within subjects

Within Cells 6.37 106 .06

Time .41 1 .41 6.85 .01
Group by Time .01 1 .01 .09 .76
Sex by Time .31 1 .31 5.17 .03
Group by Sex .00 1 .00 .05 .83
by Time

 

104

Table 11 - Analysis of Variance of the Sexual Abuse Factor by Gender

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 78.97 106 .75
Group .18 1 .18 .24 .62
Sex 10.47 1 10.47 14.05 .00
Group by Sex 1.09 1 1.09 1.46 .23
Within subjects
Within Cells 9.97 106 .09
Time .07 1 .07 .78 .38
Group by Time .02 1 .02 .24 .63
Sex by Time .28 1 .28 2.99 .09
Group by Sex .01 1 .01 .09 .77
by Time

 

105

Table 12 - Mean Item Scores for Benign and Common Fear Factor Based on Age

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest

Experimental Control Experimental Control

M (SIDE M (sum M (312)11 M (512)11
WM
Benign 1.11 (0.22) 28 1.05 (0.11) 26 1.09 (0.14) 28 1.08 (0.17) 26
Factor
Common 1.56 (0.47) 28 1.63 (0.50) 26 1.36 (0.35) 28 1.57 (0.44) 26
Fear Factor
QIdS’LChildren
Benign 1.18 (0.48) 26 1.21 (0.34) 30 1.17 (0.36) 26 1.18 (0.36) 30
Factor
Common 1.44 (0.35) 26 1.44 (0.35) 30 1.43 (0.43) 26 p 1.34 (0.38) 30
Fear Factor

 

106

Table 13 - Sum Scores for Benign and Common Fear Factor Based on Age Group

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest

Experimental Control Experimental Control

M (512)11 M (SEN; M (SD)n M (sum
Youngerﬂn’ldren
Benign 7.71 (1.51) 28 7.38 (0.75) 26 7.50 (1.20) 28 7.38 (1.36) 26
Factor
Common 9.36 (2.84) 28 9.77 (2.98) 26 7.89 (2.10) 28 9.42 (2.63) 26
Fear Factor
QIderLZhildren
Benign 8.15 (3.41) 26 8.50 (2.40) 30 8.12 (2.53) 26 8.23 (2.50) 30
Factor
Common 8.54 (2.00) 26 8.57 (2.08) 30 8.38 (2.48) 26 8.03 (2.25) 30
Fear Factor

 

107

Table 14 - MANOVA of the Benign and Common Fear Factor by Age Group

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects

Within Cells 27.11 106 .26 .
Group .04 1 .04 . 1 7 .68
Age .01 1 .01 .02 .88
Group by Age .12 1 .12 .47 .49

Within subjects
Within Cells 18.00 106 .17
Fear 12.65 1 12.65 74.48 .00
Group by Fear .06 l .06 .36 .55
Age by Fear 1.30 l 1.30 7.67 .01
Group by Age .41 1 .41 2.42 .12
by Fear

Within subjects
Within Cells 4.70 106 .04
Time .29 1 .29 6.55 .01
Group by Time .01 1 .01 .17 .68
Age by Time .02 l .02 .35 .56
Group by Age .15 1 .15 3.41 .07
by Time

Within subjects
Within Cells 4.90 106 .05
Fear by Time .17 l .17 3.73 .06
Group by Fear by Time .00 1 .00 .05 .83
Age by Fear by Time .06 1 .06 1.38 .24
Group by Age by Fear .04 1 .04 .89 .35
by Time

 

108

Table 15 - Analysis of Variance of the Common Fear Factor by Age Group

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 29.30 106 .28
Group .10 1 .10 .38 .54
Age .75 1 .75 2.70 .10
Group by Age .49 1 .49 1.77 .19
Within subjects
Within Cells 6.44 106 .06
Time .46 1 .46 7.49 .01
Group by Time .01 l .01 .15 .70
Age by Time .07 l .07 1.16 .28
Group by Age .18 1 .18 2.88 .09
by Time
Table 16 - Analysis of Variance of the Benign Fear Factor by Age Group
SS DF MS F Sig of F
~ Between subjects
Within Cells 15.81 106 .15
Group .00 1 .00 .00 .95
Age .56 1 .56 3.77 .06
Group by Age .04 1 .04 .29 .59
Within subjects
Within Cells 3.16 106 .03
Time .01 1 .01 .26 .61
Group by Time .00 1 .00 .03 .87
Age by Time .01 1 .01 .28 .60
Group by Age .02 1 .02 .58 .45
by Time

 

109

Table 17 - RCMAS Scores for the Experimental and Control Group

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Prete st . Posttest

Experimentala Controlb Experimentala Controlb

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
Mean Item .39 (.25) .44 (.19) .31 (.28) .29 (.23)
Sum Score 10.91 (6.98) 12.48 (5.32) 8.35 (7.83) 8.07(6.39)
an = 54.
bn = 56.
Table 18 - Analysis of Variance of the RCMAS

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 10.93 108 .10
Group .02 1 .02 .19 .67
Within subjects

Within Cells 1.61 108 .01
Time .78 1 .78 52.30 .00
Group by Time .06 1 .06 3.91 .05

 

110

Table 19 - RCMAS Scores Based on Gender

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest

Experimentala Controlb Experimentala Controlb

M (312)11 M (sum M (312)11 M (sum
Memltemﬁoore
Boys .31 (.20) 23 .38 (.17) 27 .20 (.21) 23 .24 (.22) 27
Girls .46 (.26) 31 .51 (.19) 29 .38 (.31) 31 .34 (.24) 29
Surnﬁeore
Boys 8.39 (5.72) 23 10.70 (4.63) 27 5.52 (5.54) 23 6.70 (6.00) 27
Girls 12.77 (7.33) 31 14.14 (5.46) 29 10.45 (8.67) 31 9.34 (6.58) 29
Table 20 - Analysis of Variance of the RCMAS by Gender

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 9.83 106 .09
Group .05 1 .05 .49 .48
Sex 1.07 1 1.07 1 1.49 .00
Group by Sex .04 1 .04 .47 .49
Within subjects

Within Cells 1.60 106 .02
Time .78 1 .78 51.81 .00
Group by Time .05 1 .05 3.51 .06
Sex by Time .00 1 .00 .00 .98
Group by Sex by Time .01 1 .01 .82 .37

 

111

Table 21 - RCMAS Scores Based on Age Group

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest

Experimentala Controlb Experimentalal Controlb

M (sum M (sum M (812)11 M (sum
Meanltemﬁeme
Younger .33 (.27) 28 .43 (.17) 26 .22 (.25) 28 .26 (.21) 26
Children
Older .47 (.21) 26 .46 (.21) 30 .40 (.29) 26 .32 (.25) 30
Children
Sumjcore
Younger 9.11 (7.54) 28 12.04 (4.87) 26 6.04 (6.60) 28 7.23(5.75) 26
Children
Older 12.85 (5.87) 26 12.87 (5.74) 30 10.85 (8.40) 26 8.80(6.91) 30
Children

 

112

Table 22 - Analysis of Variance of the RCMAS by Age Group

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 10.18 106 .10_
Group .01 1 .01 .11 .74
Age .59 1 .59 6.17 .02
GroupbyAge .17 1 .17 1.76 .19
Within subjects
Within Cells 1.60 106 .02
Time .78 1 .78 51.69 .00
Group by Time .06 1 .06 4.05 .05
Age by Time .01 1 .01 .83 .37
Group by Age .00 1 .00 .02 .89
by Time

 

Table 23 - Sum Scores for the Experimental and Control Group on the Wist-R

 

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest

Experimentalal Controlb Experimental“ Controlb

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
WISC-R 41.82 (11.98) 39.80 (8.86) 42.09 (10.58) 40.75 (9.45)
RECOGN 3.94 (.23) 3.87 (.51) 3.95 (.23) 3.93 (.26)
SAY 11.07 (5.31) 9.64 (3.50) 11.09 (4.93) 9.44 (4.54)
DO 10.96 (5.47) 10.24 (5.07) 10.22 (4.06) 10.40 (4.44)
WHO 10.27 (3.65) 10.74 (3.83) 11.40 (3.50) 11.55 (3.37)
WHAT 5.56 (.98) 5.31(1.26) 5.44 (1.03) 5.44(1.10)
a1; = 55.

l”n: 55.

113

Table 24 - Multivariate Analysis of Variance for the WIST-R Components

 

Source

 

E Hypoth. DF Error DF p
WIST-R 1702.59 4 105 .00
Group By WIST-R 1.11 4 105 .36
Group By WIST-R By Time .81 4 105 .52
WIST-R By Time 2.76 4 105 .03

 

Table 25 - Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R RECOGNITION Component

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells .39 108 .00
Group .00 1 .00 1.25 .27
Within subjects
Within Cells .44 108 .00
Time .00 1 .00 .28 .60
Group by Time .00 1 .00 4 .28 .60
Table 26 - Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R SAY Component
SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 4.36 108 .04
Group .19 1 .19 4.61 .034
Within subjects
Within Cells 1.69 108 .02
Time .00 1 .00 .01 .94
Group by Time .00 1 .00 .09 .76

 

114

Table 27 - Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R DO Component

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 4.53 108 .04 1
Group .01 1 .01 .19 .66
Within subjects
Within Cells 2.06 108 .02
Time .00 1 .00 .19 .66
Group by Time .01 l .01 .67 .41
Table 28 - Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R WHO Component
SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 221.64 108 2.05
Group .27 1 .27 .13 .72
Within subjects
Within Cells 78.83 108 .73
Time 6.91 1 6.91 9.47 .00
Group by Time .42 1 .42 .58 .45

 

115

Table 29 - Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R WHAT Component

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 19.43 108 .18 .
Group .20 1 .20 1.12 .29
Within subjects

Within Cells 7.95 108 .07

Time .02 1 .02 .25 .62
Group by Time .03 1 .03 .44 .51

 

Table 30 - Analysis of Variance of the WIST-R SAY Component by Gender

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 4.17 106 .04
Group .15 1 .15 3.74 .06
Sex .14 1 .14 3.56 .06
Group by Sex .05 1 .05 1.23 .27
Within subjects
Within Cells 1.65 106 .02
Time .00 1 .00 .01 .91
Group by Time .00 1 .00 .24 .63
Sex by Time .02 1 .02 1.27 .26
Group by Sex .02 1 .02 1.39 .24

by Time

 

116

Table 31 - Analysis of Variance of the W'IST-R WHO Component by Age Group

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 216.57 106 2.04
Group .09 1 .09 .04 .84
Age 3.00 1 3.00 1.47 .23
Group by Age 2.09 1 2.09 1.02 .31
Within subjects
Within Cells 74.94 106 .71
Time 7.32 l 7.32 10.36 .00
Group by Time .19 1 .19 .26 .61
Age by Time 3.61 1 3.61 5.11 .03
Group by Age .28 1 .28 .40 .53

by Time

 

Table 32 - T-Tests Between High Versus Low CFS-R Factors/Anxiety on WIST-R

 

 

Source T-Value DF Sig of T
Sexual Abuse Fear .58 104 .57 '
Common Fear -.28 80 .78
Benign Fear 1.83 57 .07

RCMAS - 1.42 101 .16

 

117

Table 33 - Analysis of Variance of High/Low Sexual Abuse Fear and WIST-R

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 335.90 102 3.29
Group .36 1 .36 .11 .74
High/Low Sexual Abuse Fear .98 1 .98 .30 .59
High/Low Sexual Abuse 7.92 1 7.922 .41 .12
Fear by Group
Within subjects
Within Cells 1 13.99 102 1.12
Time 7.25 1 7.25 6.48 .01
Group by Time .40 1 .40 .36 .55
High/Low Sexual .09 1 .09 .08 .78
Abuse Fear By Time
Group by Time by High/ .46 1 .46 .41 .52
Low Sexual Abuse Fear
Table 34 - Analysis of Variance of High/Low Benign Fear and WIST-R
SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 342.11 104 3.29
Group .25 l .25 .08 .78
High/Low Benign Fear 7.00 1 7.00 2.13 .15
High/Low Benign Fear 2.58 1 2.58 .79 .38
By Group
Within subjects
Within Cells 1 12.24 104 1.08
Time 8.58 1 8.58 7.95 .01
Group by Time .24 1 .24 .22 .64
High/Low Benign Fear 2.81 1 2.81 2.61 .11
By Time
Group by Time by .34 1 .34 .31 .58

High/Low Benign Fear

 

118

Table 35 - Analysis of Variance of High/Low Common Fear and WIST-R

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 243.75 78 3.13
Group .92 1 .92 .29 .59
High/Low Common Fear .94 1 .94 .30 .57
High/Low Common Fear 2.40 1 2.40 .77 .38
By Group
Within subjects
Within Cells 80.38 78 1.03
Time 6.08 1 6.08 5.90 .02
Group by Time .66 1 .66 .64 .43
High/Low Common Fear .16 1 .16 .16 .69
By Time
Group by Time by .85 1 .85 .82 .37

High/Low Common Fear

 

Table 36 - Analysis of Variance of High/Low Anxiety and WIST-R

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 324.55 99 3.28
Group .62 1 .62 . 1 9 .66
High/Low Anxiety 14.88 1 14.88 4.54 .04
High/Low Anxiety 7.69 1 7.69 2.35 .13
By Group
Within subjects
Within Cells 102.73 99 1.04
Time 5.76 1 5.76 5.55 .02
Group by Time .02 1 .02 .02 .88
High/Low Anxiety .53 1 .53 .51 .48
By Time
Group by Time by .53 1 .53 .51 .48

High/Low Anxiety

 

119

Table 37 - Analysis of Variance of the AS Interference Component

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 10.85 92 .12 -
Group .00 l .00 .03 .87
Within subjects
Within Cells 4.34 92 .05
Time .36 1 .36 7.66 .01
Group by Time .06 1 .06 1.26 .26
Table 38 - Analysis of Variance of the AS Worry Component
SS DF MS F Sig of F
Between subjects
Within Cells 10.38 88 .12
Group .01 1 .01 .08 .77
Within subjects
Within Cells 3.35 88 .04
Time .55 1 .55 14.39 .00
Group by Time .01 1 .01 .22 .64

 

120

Table 39 - Frequencies of the AS Content Categories

 

 

 

 

Time
Pretest Posttest
Experimental Control Experimental Control
Contentﬁategories
Sexual Abuse 88 98 66 76
New/Unknown Situation 43 33 36 18
Benign Touch 28 29 1 8 l3
Nonspeciﬁed Aggression 25 31 25 21
When Confronted w/Abuse 23 20 24 16
When Child is Alone 20 23 14 15
Kidnapping 1 8 22 25 19
When Child is in a Public 15 17 16 09
Place
Concern For Person’s 15 14 10 08
Well Being
When Child is Home 10 11 03 09
Hitting l 1 09 07 05
Threat of Death 05 1 1 06 07
Burglary 06 07 06 04
Nonintentional Harm/Child 08 06 07 04
Visceral Reaction 11 06 04 06
Unwanted Activity 05 05 00 02
Child In Trouble 04 04 04 06
Hanning Others 03 03 01 04
Verbal Aggression 04 02 01 00
Nonintentional Harm/ 01 02 01 02
Other
Person In Trouble 01 01 02 00
Vague Response 18 20 11 13
Child Does Not Know 06 03 02 04

 

Note, See Appendix I for description of content categories.

121

Table 40 - Summary of Significant Findings

 

 

 

Measures
Fear Anxiety - Knowledge
Program No differences Control group No differences
Effects between groups. revealed a greater between groups.
decline over time.

Time Decrease in Decrease over Increase over
Effects common fear level. time. time on WHO.
Age Older children Older children Younger children
Effects had greater had greater increased on

benign fear level. anxiety. WHO.
Gender Girls had higher Girls had higher No effects.
Effects sexual abuse and anxiety.

common fear levels.

Girls revealed a

decline in common

fear level over

time whereas boys'

common fear level

remained constant.

Boys revealed a decline

in sexual abuse fear over

time whereas girls’

sexual abuse fear level

remained constant.
High/Low Not assessed. Not assessed. Children with high
Anxiety and anxiety levels had
Fear Levels high knowledge

levels.

 

122

APPENDIX I

APPENDIX I

APPREHENSION SCALE (AS) CODING MANUAL

Instmclions:
- Coding is based on child's aotual responses, not on child's implied responses.

- Throughout the coding manual, CHILD refers to the child being tested
and PERSON refers to the person involved in the child's fear.

- Leave blank any line that does not receive a code.

 

 

1. DO YOU EVER FEEL SCARED OR WORRY ABOUT THE FEAR?

1. I=XES 0:119

 

 

A. WHEN DO YOU FEEL SCARED OR WORRIED ABOUT THE FEAR?
B. WHAT IS IT ABOUT THE FEAR THAT MAKES YOU SCARED?

If NO, then draw a line down the rest of the coding sheet for the question.
If YES, then continue.

2. through 6. CONTENT CATEGORY(IES) of child's exppession of fear/worry
Based on child's response(s) mentioned in A. and B., score all relevant content categories

(maximum of 5) on coding sheet [if less than ﬁve categories are coded, then leave the
unused numbers blank].

 

CONTENT CATEGORIES

 

I23

124

Enyatopartoandiopupdreosmg. Private parts and/or undressing is mentioned or inferred
in the child's fear {relating to child and/or child's signiﬁcant other(s)}. For questions 1
through 7, if it is unclear which subcategory to use, then score as a benign situation
(1.2)]: If child answers "yes" to question 5 and 8, then 1.2 will always be coded (unless
child speciﬁes a sexual abuse situation). If child answers "yes" to questions 9 and/or 10,
then 1.1 will always be coded (unless child speciﬁes a benign touch situation).

11W

-"like if they are a stranger or a friend,
they might want to show you their p.p."

L2 W [involving P-P-l ((100103, baths, etc.).
-"when they [doctors] look at my p.p."

-"when they [babysitters] tell me to take off clothes (for baths, etc.").

 

WWW. Aggressive actions by person intending to hurt
child/person is mean to child. [Note: If it is unclear/ambiguous whether the person's
aggressive actions are intentional then code as 4.0--nonintentional harm towards child.]:

Ll Wnimludes the use of drugs or alcohol

-"when we don't know what they're [stranger] gonna do/they might hurt
me” {This example would also be coded 12--novel situation}

-" [scared to leave house when] go to friends/because there are mean
dogs/because the dogs are mean and they get loose"

-"when they [strangers] make me do something I don't want to"
2.2 W

-“they might yell at me"/"they might say 'boo' to scare me"
2.3 W

-"sometimes walking in street or at mall/they [strangers] might try
kidnapping you or something"

125

2A !" In .lkﬂ‘l '111‘ 1,....,11-1.
W

- [scared of strangers] "when I'm around a lot of people/
they might hit me"

2.5 IHREALQEDEAIH (e.g., shooting/killing/poisoning)

- "like if they [stranger] ask me to come in my house if they're at my
door/them hurting me (pr.) kill me"

 

‘111o._-.°°-‘ .111 1.1' 11 ‘ 11 1 '1, -., 11‘..
(e.g., child's house, dog, ﬁiends and parents)
[Note: If it is unclear/ambiguous whether the person's aggressive actions are intentional
then code as 5.0--nonintentional harm of possession/other]:

11W

- "when somebody [neighbor] stops by and asks to use the phone/I'm afraid
the person wilt my mom or something"

- "if babysitter lets other use phone from outside/babysitter will get beat up
by the person"

32W

- "at night/the neighbor might be a burglar/they'll break in and steal
something"

 

NouintentionaLhannJox/arduhild. Actions by person (not intended to be aggressive
towards child) that may injure child. [Note: If it is unclear/ambiguous whether the

person's aggressive actions are intentional then code under this content category (40--
nonintentional harm towards child).]:

MW

- "when they [neighbors] are doing drugs/they just ﬂy down our street and I
almost got hurt"

- "because they [neighbors] shoot guns/they might shoot me"

126

- "I wouldn't like it/they [doctor looking at pp.] might hurt me by touching
p.p. {This example would also be coded l.2--benign touch situation.)

 

111 ‘1111. 11.1111 1°1' 11 ‘ '11..11_.1 '1’ 1.1 1.1' . Actions(not
intended to be aggressive) that may harm child's possession(s) or signiﬁcant others.
[Note: If it is unclear/ambiguous whether the person's aggressive actions are intentional
then code under this content category (5.0--nonintentional harm of possession/other).]:

10W

- "IDK/if mom's baking a cake and leaves it on the stove (pr.) burns down
the house"

- "when he [uncle] gets mad/he keeps getting a divorce from my aunt, that
worries me"

 

Coneemioopersonﬂooopersonsﬂdlﬂg. [Note: a perpetrator has not acted upon the

person, that is, content category 3 or 5 is not relevant]:
ﬁll W

- "when they neighbor have to go to hospital or some thing like that/the
ones that I like I don't want them to get hurt"

- "when I ﬁnd out my uncle's drinking/he drives and I'm scared he'll get in
an accident"

 

Looationoosituationoﬂohildlsoyony [Notez More than one of these subcategories may

be relevant. For example, whenever child responds "home alone" then both 7.0 and 7.]
should be coded]:

Z._Q LEELALQNE or is without a responsible adult
- "I'm scared of them [strangers] when I'm alone"

LIHQME

13

W child is in a public place (e.g., malls, school, grocery
store, etc.)

Z,_4, W3 child worries when someone touches p.p. or when
someone asks to touch p.p.

127

 

that [child has done something wrong]:

MW

- "if someone didn't like me they [person asking child to touch their p.p.]
might tell your mom to get you in trouble (tell what?) that I was
touching p.p."

- [child is fearful of going to school] "when I'm in trouble (pr.) like beating
up a kid/ getting conduct"

 

. O C. C C O O O
‘ 1.". °‘ 11.1.1‘111 11 -‘11 111 ‘11-. .1'1' 11 11 .111't1

do_th_at [person has done something wrong]:

29W

- [someone asking to touch p.p.] "when I'm alone/I know they're not
supposed to/it's not right and they could get into trouble for doing that"

 

Unﬂamedaotjyuy. Child might have to do something(s) that they do not want to do that
is considered benign and/or usual/typical:

15W

- "they [babysitter] tell me what to do/tells me to take a nap"

- "when they [relatives] want to take me to K'mart."

 

VioeeLalJeaotion. Child does not like it (e.g., "its disgusting"):
15 W
- [someone asking child to touch p.p.] "idk/idk/I probably wouldn't like it"
- "IDK/I just don't like it when doctors look at pp."
- "I don't feel comfortable"

- "because it is gross"

128

 

Novy/lioyelﬂlmmmnouuanon. Child is fearful of new/novel/unknown situation or
person. [Reminderz Child must express that he or she is fearful of the situation or person
because it is new. Do not assume this content category for persons or situations that are
inherently novel (e.g., strangers, ﬁrst day of school) without the child explicitly
expressing that he or She if fearful because it is unknown]

11 W
- "the ﬁrst day [of school]/I don't know what my teacher's like"

- "when I'm going somewhere I've never been/ [I'm scared of] where we're
going to"

- "I don't know who they are really/I don't know them and haven't seen them
before"

 

Xaguoonjneleyam responses. [Note: Only score this category if no other content
category was mentioned in the child's entire response].

18W

 

112K - child doesn't know. [Note: Only score this category if mother content category
was mentioned in the child's entire response].

IQIDK

 

 

C. DOES FEELING SCARED OR WORRIED ABOUT [THE FEAR] EVER
STOP YOU FROM DOING SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO DO?

7. 1=XES Q=l_\LQ

 

 

If NO, then draw a line through 8 - 11 and proceed to code D.
If YES, then code the rest of C.

 

8. ACTIVITY ONE CATEGORY (see description below)
9. ACTIVITY TWO CATEGORY (see description below)

129

 

ACTIVITY CATEGORIES

 

y—a

- playing [e.g., playing nintendo; playing when child has to study]

2 - going to or being at a speoiﬁed destination [e.g., library, store, friend's
house, up the hill, etc.]

U)

- going to a nonspeeiﬁed destination [e.g., going or being outside]
4 - bike riding (to a nonspeoiﬁed destination)
5 - staying home alone

6 - sleeping [e.g. going to bed]

7 - homework/work/reading
8 - chores
9 - strangers [e.g., people whom child doesn't know]

10 -discarded

11 - vague response/should have been prompted/possibly irrelevant or category
NBC
12 - idk

 

 

10.

11.

FREQUENCY ONE Circled response of "how often" corresponding to activity
one.

FREQUENCY TWO Circled response of "how often" corresponding to activity
two.

 

 

D. DO YOU EVER WORRY OR FEEL SCARED ABOUT THAT [THE
FEAR] WHEN YOU ARE NOT AROUND THE FEAR?

130
12. l = YES Q = NO or if worry exists around child's fear

Make sure that the ﬂheu response of the child's worry is not when the child is actually
around the child's fear or worry that was expressed in A. and B. If the fear is present,
then score as 0.

If NO then draw a line through 13 - 17 and begin to code the next question.

If YES, then proceed with D.

 

13. WORRY FREQUENCY Circled response of "how often" worry.

 

14. through 17. WORRY DESCRIPTION(S) of child's exppeeaionﬁ) of "when they
worry." Score all relevant worry descriptions (that are deﬁned below).

 

WORRY DESCRIPTIONS

 

l IMMEDIATE - the child worries when he/she is anticipating a worry that
will possibly occur in the immediate future.
- [letting a doctor look at p.p.] "the day or two before I go to the doctor"
- "when it's the day before they come over"
2 {discarded}
3 ENMIRQNMENI - the child worries when something in the his/her
environment reminds the child of the fear: A stimulus in their environment.

- [worried about uncle getting hurt in the Gulf War] "when I'm watching the
war on the TV."

- [worried about Aunt dying] "when she [the aunt] is in the hospital"

- [scared of going to school] "on the ﬁrst day of school"

- "when I hear she is making a cake"

l-h

QHILQ - the child seems to generate the worry himself/herself, that is,
nothing in his/her environment seems to be triggering the worry.

- "at bedtime"/ "eating"/ "when I don't have anything else to think about"/
"playing game"

5, W - the child's response for when they worry is "idk" or too
vague to code.

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Angelino, H, Dollins, J., & Mech, E. V. (1956). Trends 1n the "fears and worries"
of school children as related to socio-economic status and age. .lmlmaioﬂﬁeneﬁe

W, 263- 276.

Barrios, B. A. ,Hartmann, DB, & Shigetomi, C. (1981). Fears and anxretles 1n

children. In E. J. Mash & L. G. Terdal (Eds), Eehayionaleoseeemenoofehildhood
disoders (pp. 259- 304). New York. Guilford Press.

Bauer, D. H. (1 976). An exploratory study of developmental changes 1n children's
fears loumalsoﬂChilstxehologxandEsyehiamLJl. 69- 74

Beitchman, J .H., Zucker, K.J., Hood, J .E., DaCosta, G.A., & Akman, D. (1991).
A review of the short-term effects of child sexual abuse. ChildAbusoandNegleot, 13,
537-556.

Beitchman, J.H., Zucker, K.J., Hood, J .B., DaCosta, G.A., Akman, D., &
Cassavia, E. (1992). A review of the long-term effects of child sexual abuse. thld

W9 1.6,101'118-

Benedict, L. L. W. ,& Zautra, A. A. J. (1993). Family environmental characteristics

as risk factors for childhood sexual abuse. Jimmaloﬂﬂlim'oalﬁhildlisychologylzﬂ),
365- 374.

Binder, R.L., & McNiel, DE. (1987). Evaluation of a school-based sexual abuse

prevention program: Cognitive and emotional effects. thldAhuooandﬂegleot, 11, 497-
506.

Bogat, G.A., & McGrath, M. (1988). thldhoodEeapSoale, Unpublished
manuscript.

Borkoveck, T. D., & Inz, J. (1990). The nature of worry in generalized anxiety

disorder. a predominance of thought activity. Behamouhﬁesearohandlherapyjﬁa),
153- 158.

Briggs, J. (1991). Child protection programs: Can they protect young children?
Eadyﬁhﬂdﬂexelopmemandﬁare, 61, 61 -72.

Bronson, G.W. (1969). Fear of visual novelty: Developmental patterns in males

and females. DexelopmentaLEsxeholong, 33-40.

131

132

Bronson, G. W. (1972). Infants’ reactions to unfamiliar persons and novel objects.
U1_1_1°-.11 1 1‘.1 ‘1 1 {“1 11 11' ‘11111 (3),-4653.

Cavallin, H. (1966). Incestuous fathers: A clinical report. Amen'omloumaiof
W. 1132.

Charlesworth, W.R. (1974). General Issues in the Study of Fear, Section IV. In
M. Lewis, & L.A. Rosenblum (Eds), W. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, p. 262-268.

Cohn, A. (1986). Preventing adults from becoming child molesters. ﬂhildAhuse
NW, 559-562.

Conte, J. R, &Fogarty, LA (1989, July). W

W (MII 40022 NIMH), University of Chicago,
Chicago.

Conte, J .R., Rosen, C., Saperstein, L., & Shermack, R. (1985). An evaluation of a

program to prevent the sexual victimization of young children. ChildAhuseandNegleot,
9, 319-328.

Cox, T. (1980). Stress. Baltimore, Maryland: University Park Press.

Croake, J.W., & Knox, EH. (1973). The changing nature of children's fears. Child
W. 91-105.

Currier, L. L. ,& Wurtele, S. K. (1996). A pilot study of previously abused and
non-sexually abused children’s responses to a personal safety program. W111

SexuaLAhuseiU) 71- 87-

Curtis, J .M. (1986). Factors in sexual abuse of children. EsyehologioalRepons
5_8, 591-597.

Daro, D. Duerr, J. &LeProhn, N. (1987, July). Qhﬂdaasaulppreyennon
WWW, paper presented at the Third National Family

Violence Research Conference, University of New Hampshire, Durham.

Derevensky, J. L. (1979). Children's fears: a developmental comparison of normal

and exceptional children. Ihe_.Loumal_of_QeneuoEsyehology._l35, 11-2.1

Dodge, K.A. (1989). Coordinating responses to aversive stimuli: introduction to a

special section on the development of emotion regulation. QeyelopmemaLEsyehology,
23(3), 339-342.

133

Dong, Q., Yang, B., & Ollendick, T. H. (1994). Fears 1n Chinese children and

adolescents and their relations to anxiety and depression. JoumaLoLChildEsyehology
W20) 351 -363

Downer, A. (1984). Eyeluationoﬁalkingahounouohing. Unpublished

manuscript.

Draper, T. W., & James, R. S. (1985). Preschool fears: longitudinal sequence and
cohort changes. thld_Sm_dy_J_m1maL_1_3(2), 147-156.

Elrod, J. M., & Rubin, R. H. (1993). Parental involvement in sexual abuse
prevention education. thldAhuseandNegleoLﬂ, 527-538.

Eysenck, M.W. (1976). Arousal, Learning, and Memory. Esyehologiealﬂulletin,
33(3), 389-404.

Faller, KC. (1989). Why sexual abuse? An exploration of the intergenerational
hypothesis. ChildAhuseandNeglecLil, 543-548.

F amularb R. (1992). Substance abuse and the nature of child maltreatment. thld
AbuseandﬁeglectﬂelmemauonaLloumaLJoﬂ) 475-483

Ferrari, M. (1986). Fears and phobias in childhood. Some clinical and
developmental considerations. Wm, 11, 75- 88.

Finkelhor. D- (1984). Chﬂdsexualahuseﬂemheomandreseareh New York:

Free Press.

Finkelhor, D. (1986). Abusers. Specialtopics. In D. Finkelhor (Ed.,) Axouree:
hookonehildjexualjhusemp. 119- 142). Beverly Hills: Sage.

Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G. Lewis, I. A, & Smith, C. (1990). Sexual abuse in a
national survey of adult men and women: Prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors.

ChﬂdAhuseandNegleslHM 192.8

Frijda, NH. (1993). The place of appraisal in emotion. QognitionondEmotion,
1(3/4), 357-387.

Fryer, G., Kraizer, S., & Miyoshi, T. (1987). Measuring children's retention of
skills to resist stranger abduction: Use of the simulation technique. thldAhuseand

NeglELll. 181-185-

Garbarino, J. (1987). Children's response to a sexual abuse prevention program: A

study of the spiderrnan comic. thldAouseaodliegleoI, 1_1, 143-148.

134

Gibson, G, & Bogat, G. A. (1993). Pretesting effects 1n the evaluation of a sexual

abuse education program for preschool children. JoumalofﬁluﬁﬁexuﬂﬁousojG), 15-
31.

Graziano, A.M, DeGiovanni, I.S., & Garcia, K.A. (1979). Behavioral treatment of
children's fears: A review. Esyehologioalﬁulletin, 8o(4), 804-830.

Gullone, E. ,& King, N. J. (1994). The fears of youth 1n the 19908: contemporary
normative data Iheloumalofﬁeneneﬁsxeholoudﬁa), 137- 153

Hall, GS. (1897). A study of fears. WW 147-249.

Hazzard, A.P., Webb, C., & Kleemeier, C., Angert, L., & Pohl, J. (1991). Child

sexual abuse prevention: Evaluation and one-year follow-up. ChildAhusoandlﬂeglect,
1_1, 143-148.

Hodiarnont, P. (1991). How normal are anxiety and fear? Ihejntemational
IoumaloﬂﬁociaLRsxchiatm 31(1) 43- 50

Jacobs, J.E., Hashima, P.Y., & Kenning, M. (1995). Children's perceptions of the
risk of sexual abuse. thld_Ab_us_e_and_Negleet__12(12), 1443-1456.

Jersild, A.T., & Holmes, F .B. (1935). Children's Fears: Child Developmental,
Monograph No. 20. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Jersild, AT. (1950). thldEsyehology (3rd ed.). London: Staple Press.

Jersild, AT. (1968). W (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
Hall Inc.

Jersild, A.T., Markey, F.V., & Jersild, CL. (1933). Children's fears, dreams,
wishes, daydrearns, likes, dislikes, pleasant and unpleasant memories. thld

DexelopmentMonographs No. 12.

Johnson, S. B., & Melamed, B. G. (1979). The assessment of treatment of

children's fears. In B. B. Lahey and A. E. Kazdin (Eds), Ad_ances_in_Clinioal_Child
Esyehology (vol. 2), (pp. 107-139). New York: Plenum.

Jones, E., & Borgers, S. (1988). Parent perceptions of ch1ldrens fears. Elementary
Sehoolﬁadanceandﬁounsehng, 23 10- 15

Kagan, J ., Kearsley, R.B., & Zelazo, PR. (1978). Infancy: Its place in human
development. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

135
Kagan, J., & Moss, HA. (1962). Birth to maturity. New York: Wiley.

Kiemel, K. B. & Bogat, G. A. (August, 1991). Assessing preschooler's fears
following a sexual abuse education program. In M. P. McGrath (Chair), W

onﬁexuaLAbpseEdueationjopEreoehoolets Symposium conducted at the 1991 annual

convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA.

King, N.J., Gullone, E., & Stafford, C. (1990). Fears in visually impaired and
normally sighted children and adolescents. loumaLofSehooLEsyehologyzﬁ, 225-231.

King,N..,J Hamilton, DI., & Ollendick, TH (1988). Childrenxphohiasxa
hehLioralpeLspeotiye, Chichester, England: Wiley.

King,N. J., Ollier, K, Iacuone, R. Schuster, S., Bays, K, Gullone, E., &
Ollendick, T. H. (1989). Fears of children and adolescents: A cross-sectional Australian

study using the revised- fear survey schedule for children. lotlmalofﬂhildEsyehology
W420. 775-784

Lapouse, R., & Monk, M. (1959). Fears and worries in a representative sample of

children. Amenoanlournalofﬂrthopsxchm 803-818.

Lazarus, RS. (1969). Rattemsofladjustmentandhumaneﬂeetixeness New York:
McGraw—Hill.

Lazarus, RS. (1976). Eattemsoﬂadjusnnent. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lewis, M., & Brooks, J. (1974). Self, other, and fear: infants' reactions to people.
In M. Lewis & L. A. Rosenblum (Eds), Iheoriginooffear (pp. 195-227).

Marks, 1. (1987). The development of normal fear: a review. loumaLoLChild
Embologundimhiatrxaﬂﬁ), 667-697.

Martorell, C., Peiro, R. Llacer, M. D., Navarro, A., Flores, P., & Silva, F. (1990).
Assessing behavioral problems and assets in children and adolescents. Eemonalityand

Indixidualﬂiffeneneesﬂﬂz) 1221 1226-

Maurer, A. (1965). What children fear. MW 265-
277.

McCann, J .T. (1995). Obsessive attachment and the victimization of children: Can

antistalking legislation provide protection? MW, 93-112.

Miller, L. C., Barrett, C. L. ,,Hampe E. ,,&Noble H. (1972). Factor structure of
childhood fears. loumalofﬂonsultingandﬂliniemhxehologwa) 264- 265-

136

Miller-Perrin, C.L., & Wurtele, SK. (1986, August). Harmﬁrl effects of school-
based sexual abuse prevention programs? Reassure the parents. Paper presented at the
meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.

Miltenberger, R., & Thiesse- Duffy, E. (1988). Evaluation of home-based

programs for teaching personal safety skills to children. loumaloﬂAppliedﬂehayjox
Analxsis 21(1). 81- 87

Moracco, J. & Camilleri, J. (1983). A study of fears 1n elementary school
children ElementanLScthLdeanceandﬁounselngﬂ 82- 87.

Morris, E, Davis, M. A, & Hutchings, C. H. (1981). Cognitive and emotional
components of anxiety. Literature review and a revised Worry-Emotionality Scale.

IoumalofEducatlonaLRsxcholongl, 541-555.

Morris R1 &KratoohwiU. T..R (1983) Ireatmgchlldrensfearsandphom
hehayioraLapproaeh, New York. Pergarnon Press.

Murphy, D.M. (1985). Fears in preschool-age children. M.
14(3), 171-189.

Nemerofsky, A. G., Carran, D. T., & Rosenberg, L. A. (1994). Age variation in
performance among preschool children in a sexual abuse prevention program. JournaLof

ChﬂdSexualAhuseJﬂ), 85-102.

Nibert, D., Cooper, S., & Ford, J. (1989). Parents' observations of the effect of a
sexual-abuse prevention program on preschool children. thldﬂelfare, 68(5), 539-546.

Ohman, A. (1993). Fear and anxiety as emotional phenomena: clinical

phenomenology, evolutionary perspectives, and inforrnation-processing mechanisms. In
M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds), Hmdbookoﬂemotions (pp. 511-536). New York: The
Guilford Press.

Ollendick, TH. (1983). Reliability and validity of the Revised Fear Survey
Schedule for Children (FSSC-R). Behayiou;Re5eamh_and_Ihenapy,_21, 685-692. .

Ollendick, T.H., King, N. J ., & F rary, R. (1989). Fears in children and
adolescents: Reliability and generalizability across gender, age and nationality. Behayiour

Researehandlherapx, 21. 19-26.

Ollendick, T. H. Y,,ule W. & Ollier, K. (1991). Fears 1n British children and their

relationship to manifest anxiety and depression. ,lomnalofﬂhildﬂsyehologyand
W0), 321 -.331

137

Perrin, S. & Last, C. G. (1992). Do childhood anxiety measures measure anxiety?

.LoumaloﬂAhnonnalEhlldEsxeholongQw), 567- 578.

Piaget, J. (1955). W New York: Meridian
Books.

Piaget, J. (1962). Elay,_dr_eams_and_imitation_in_ehildhoo¢ New York: W.W.

Norton.

Pintner, R., & Lev, J. (1940). Worries of school children. Loumaloﬂﬁenetie
monologue, 67-76.

Plummer, C. A. (1986). Prevention education perspective. In M. Nelson and K.

Clark (EdS) IheEdueatoLsﬂudeJoELLemmgﬁthSexuaLAhusewp 1- 5) Santa

Cruz: Network Publications.

Polanyi, M. (1966). IhetaeiLdimeneion, New York: Doubleday.
Them 375-387.

Ratto, R., & Bogat B. A. (1990). An evaluation of a preschool curriculum to

educate children 1n the prevention of sexual abuse. loumalofﬁomnmﬂmholm
1.8, 289- 297.

Repucci, N.D., & Haugaard, J .J .(1989). Prevention of child sexual abuse: Myth or
reality? AmenieanﬁsxehologisLAﬂU 0). 1266-1275.

Reynolds, C.R., & Richmond, B.O. (1978). "What I Think and Feel": A revised

measure of children's manifest anxiety scale. loumaloﬂAhnonnalﬂhiLdEsyehology, o,
27 l -280.

Reynolds, C.R., & Richmond, B.O. (1985). WWW
SQﬂlﬂRCMASLManuaL Western Psychological Services.

Robinson, E.H., Rotter, J.C., Fey, M.A., & Robinson, S.L. (1991). Children’s
Fears: Toward a preventive model. Ihe_S_ehool_CounseloL_3_8, 187-202.

Sang, D. (1994). “Just Say No” may not be enough to prevent child sexual abuse.
MG), 603-605.

Saslawsky, D. A., & Wurtele, S. K. (1986). Educating children about sexual abuse:
Implications for pediatric intervention and possible prevention. .loumaloﬂiediatrie

Psychology, 11, 235-245.

138

Scarr, S., & Salapatek, P. (1970). Patterns of fear development during infancy.
MenillzlialmeLQuarterlm 5 3-90.

Shah, R..,Z Dail, P. W., & Heinrichs, T. (1995). Familial inﬂuences upon the
occurrence of childhood sexual abuse. lolmtalofﬂhildﬁexuaLAhuseAM), 45-61.

Sigel, LE (1964). The attainment of concepts InM. L. Hoffman, & L. W.
Hoffman (Eds), Reyieyvofohildjeyelopmentjesemeh. New York: Russell Sage

Foundation.

Spence, S. H. ,& McCathie, H. (1993). The stability of fears 1n children: a two-

year prospective study: a research note. Joumaloff‘hlldﬂsyehologyatﬁﬂsyehiatry.
33(4), 579- 585.

Staley, A. A. ,& O'Donnell, J. P. (1984). A developmental analysis of mothers'
reports of normal children's fears.]]3e_.loumal_of_G_enetloEsyohology,_14$ 165-178.

Stevenson, H. W. (1972). thldpenloleammg. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.

Swan, H.L., Press, A.N., & Briggs, S.L. (1985). Child sexual abuse prevention:
Does it work? thldﬂelfare, MM), 395-405.

Tharinger, D.J., Krivacska, J.J., Laye-McDonough, M., Jamison, L., Vincent,
G.G., & Hedlund, AD. (1988). Prevention of child sexual abuse: An analysis of issues,

educational programs, and research ﬁndings WWW—11(4), 614-634.

Tikalsky, F .D., & Wallace, SD. (1988). Culture and the structure of children's
fears. MW“). 481-492-

Trudell, B. & Whatley, M.H. (1988). School sexual abuse prevention: Unintended
consequences and dilemmas. thldAhusoandﬂegleoLJZ, 103-113.

Tutty, L. M. (1991). Child sexual abuse: A range of prevention options. In B.
Thomlison & C. Bagley (Eds), Child sexual abuse: Expanding the research base on

program and treatment outcomes. [Special Edition] loumalofﬂhiidandjouthﬂare (pp.
23 41), Calgary, AB, Canada. University of Calgary Press.

Tutty, L.M. (1992). The ability of elementary school children to learn child sexual
abuse prevention concepts. thldAhusoandNegleotolo, 369-3 84

Tutty, L.M. (1993). Parent’s perceptions of their child’s knowledge of sexual
abuse prevention concepts. loumaloLClxildSexualAhuseJO), 83-103.

139

Vandenberg, B. (1993). Fears of normal and retarded children. Esyohologioal
W. 473-474-

Werner, H. (1957). The concept of development from a comparative and

organismic point of view. In D. B. Harris (Ed.), IhesonoeptoﬂdeyelopmenL

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press

Werner, H. ,& Kaplan, E. (1952). The acquisition of word meaning: a

develOPmental study Mono! SocieELQLResearchoLChildllexelopmentiiﬂ), Whole
No.51.

Wolfe, D.A., MacPherson, T., Blount, R., & Wolfe, U. V. (1986). Evaluation of a
brief intervention for educating school children in awareness of physical and sexual

abuse. ChildAhuseandlieglecLJﬂ. 85-92.

Wolfe, & Gentile (1988). Psychological assessment of sexually abused children.

In W. T. O’ Donohue and J. H. Geer (Eds ) IheﬁexualAhuseothildremﬂeom
Resemohpandjhempy, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Wurtele, S. K. (1990). Teaching personal safety Skills to four-year-old children: A
behavioral approach. Behayiorjherapy, 21, 25- 32.

Wurtele, S. K., Kast, L.C., & Melzer, A.M. (1992). Sexual abuse prevention
education for young children: A comparison of teachers and parents as instructors. Child

Abuseandl‘ieglectJﬁ. 865-876.

Wurtele, s. K Kast, L. C. Miller-Penin, C. L. & Kondrick, P A. (1989).
Comparison of programs for teaching personal safety skills to preschoolers loumaLof

Consultingandﬂinicallmhologx 51(4) 505- 511

Wurtele, S.K., & Miller-Penin, CL. (1987). An evaluation of side effects
associated with participation in a child sexual abuse prevention program. loumalof
SchooLHealth, 51(6). 228-231-

    

HIGAN sran UNI IV.

32,llll Ill olllll l

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

llllllllllllllllllll