↓ Skip to main content

Parents' perception of children's fear: from FSSC-IT to FSSC-PP

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Parents' perception of children's fear: from FSSC-IT to FSSC-PP
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01199
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvia Salcuni, Carla Dazzi, Stefania Mannarini, Daniela Di Riso, Elisa Delvecchio

Abstract

Studies involving parents' reports about children's fears and multiple informant comparisons are less extended than investigations on children's self-reporting fear schedules. Starting with the Italian version of FSSC-R, the FSSC-IT, the main aims of this study were to adapt a schedule for parents' perception of their children's fear: the FSSC-Parent Perception. Its psychometric properties were examined in a large sample of parents (N = 2970) of children aged 8-10 years. Exploratory and confirmatory factorial structures were examined and compared with the Italian children's ones. Mother vs. father, children's gender and school age group effects were analyzed. The confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a four correlated factors solution model (Fear of Danger and Death; Fear of Injury and Animals; Fear of Failure and Criticism; Fear of the unknown and Phobic aspects). Some effects related to child gender, age group, mother vs. father, were found. The FSSC-PP properties supported its use by parents to assess their children's fears. A qualitative analysis of the top 10 fears most endorsed by parents will be presented and compared with children's fears. Clinical implications about the quality of parent-child relationships where discussed, comparing mothers and fathers, and parents' perception about daughters' and sons' most endorsed fears.

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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Professor 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 45%
Social Sciences 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 August 2015.
All research outputs
#17,768,879
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,444
of 29,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,130
of 264,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#430
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 264,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.