Scholarlink

<p>Theory and empirical evidence suggest the utility of expanding the traditional set of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs); however, debate over how ACEs should be conceptualized and measured has intensified. This study examines three conceptualizations of ACE assessment among justice-involved adults: (1) summed composites, (2) a refined reflexive model, and (3) formative latent variable models. Justice-involved individuals provide a valuable population for both impact and insight. Participants were <i>n</i> = 552 adults on probation or parole who were assessed for traumatic and adverse childhood experiences (TRACEs) using original and expanded tools and also completed measures of psychological flexibility and coercive control. Exploratory factor analysis supported an 11-factor solution—physical/emotional abuse, domestic violence, sexual abuse, household mental illness, household drug/alcohol abuse, physical neglect, separation/divorce, emotional neglect, disasters/war/accidents, lack of community safety, and incarcerated household member—accounting for 84% of variance. Results indicated that formative models tended to yield the highest variance explained (e.g., R² = 0.13 for psychological flexibility, R² = 0.09 for coercive control), with refined multi-component factor scores performing well in both linear regression and formative SEM, and summed scores performing least well. Profile analyses showed sex differences and interactions with offense type. For example, while females reported higher sexual abuse, household dysfunction, and emotional neglect; males reported relatively greater disasters/war/accidents, but males with violent offences showing elevated sexual abuse and emotional neglect. Findings support the analytic and screening advantages of multi-item indicators of TRACEs, highlight meaningful exposure patterns by sex and offense, and suggest formative and pattern-based approaches for trauma-informed assessment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Assessing Traumatic and Adverse Childhood Experiences: A Conceptual and Empirical Comparison of Approaches in Justice System Involved Individuals

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月23日

查看全文
  • Carl F. Weems,
  • Amie Zarling

摘要

Theory and empirical evidence suggest the utility of expanding the traditional set of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs); however, debate over how ACEs should be conceptualized and measured has intensified. This study examines three conceptualizations of ACE assessment among justice-involved adults: (1) summed composites, (2) a refined reflexive model, and (3) formative latent variable models. Justice-involved individuals provide a valuable population for both impact and insight. Participants were n = 552 adults on probation or parole who were assessed for traumatic and adverse childhood experiences (TRACEs) using original and expanded tools and also completed measures of psychological flexibility and coercive control. Exploratory factor analysis supported an 11-factor solution—physical/emotional abuse, domestic violence, sexual abuse, household mental illness, household drug/alcohol abuse, physical neglect, separation/divorce, emotional neglect, disasters/war/accidents, lack of community safety, and incarcerated household member—accounting for 84% of variance. Results indicated that formative models tended to yield the highest variance explained (e.g., R² = 0.13 for psychological flexibility, R² = 0.09 for coercive control), with refined multi-component factor scores performing well in both linear regression and formative SEM, and summed scores performing least well. Profile analyses showed sex differences and interactions with offense type. For example, while females reported higher sexual abuse, household dysfunction, and emotional neglect; males reported relatively greater disasters/war/accidents, but males with violent offences showing elevated sexual abuse and emotional neglect. Findings support the analytic and screening advantages of multi-item indicators of TRACEs, highlight meaningful exposure patterns by sex and offense, and suggest formative and pattern-based approaches for trauma-informed assessment.