↓ Skip to main content

Autobiographical memory specificity in child sexual abuse victims

Overview of attention for article published in Development & Psychopathology, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Autobiographical memory specificity in child sexual abuse victims
Published in
Development & Psychopathology, April 2013
DOI 10.1017/s0954579412001083
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christin M. Ogle, Stephanie D. Block, Latonya S. Harris, Gail S. Goodman, Annarheen Pineda, Susan Timmer, Anthony Urquiza, Karen J. Saywitz

Abstract

The present study examined the specificity of autobiographical memory in adolescents and adults with versus without child sexual abuse (CSA) histories. Eighty-five participants, approximately half of whom per age group had experienced CSA, were tested on the autobiographical memory interview. Individual difference measures, including those for trauma-related psychopathology, were also administered. Findings revealed developmental differences in the relation between autobiographical memory specificity and CSA. Even with depression statistically controlled, reduced memory specificity in CSA victims relative to controls was observed among adolescents but not among adults. A higher number of posttraumatic stress disorder criteria met predicted more specific childhood memories in participants who reported CSA as their most traumatic life event. These findings contribute to the scientific understanding of childhood trauma and autobiographical memory functioning and underscore the importance of considering the role of age and degree of traumatization within the study of autobiographical memory.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
New Zealand 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 81 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 54 62%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 3%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 16 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,592,920
of 14,098,181 outputs
Outputs from Development & Psychopathology
#708
of 1,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,680
of 167,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Development & Psychopathology
#21
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,098,181 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,130 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 167,687 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.