↓ Skip to main content

Young Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence Describe their Abused Parent: A Qualitative Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Family Violence, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
Young Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence Describe their Abused Parent: A Qualitative Study
Published in
Journal of Family Violence, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10896-016-9856-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karin Pernebo, Kjerstin Almqvist

Abstract

The negative impact of intimate partner violence (IPV) begins early in the child's relationship with a caregiver. Children's relationships with, and internal working models of, abused parents have rarely been documented. The aim of this study was to collect and interpret young children's accounts of their abused parent. Interviews were conducted with 17 children aged 4 to 12 years who had witnessed IPV. Thematic analysis identified three main themes and seven sub-themes: "Coherent accounts of the parent" (sub-themes of "general benevolence", "provision of support, protection, and nurture", and "parental distress"); "Deficient accounts of the parent" ("vague accounts" and "disorganized narrations"); and "The parent as a trauma trigger" ("avoidance" and "breakthrough of intrusive memories and thoughts"). The results indicate these children may hold integrated, deficient, or blocked internal representations of an abused parent, and they illustrate the benefit of including young children as informants in research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 151 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 11%
Researcher 11 7%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 54 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 28%
Social Sciences 32 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Arts and Humanities 3 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 60 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2022.
All research outputs
#7,206,795
of 24,995,564 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Family Violence
#496
of 1,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,912
of 329,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Family Violence
#13
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,995,564 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,419 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.