Validation and cross-cultural comparisons of the German Childhood Attachment and Relational Trauma Screen (CARTS)

Figures & data

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of final sample

	n (%)
Sex	140
Female	112 (80.0)
Male	25 (17.9)
Declined	3 (2.1)
Ethnical Background	140
Caucasian	123 (87.8)
Mixed ethnical background or Other	8 (5.7)
Declined	9 (6.4)
Marital Status	140
Single	95 (67.9)
Married/common-law	39 (27.8)
Widowed/Divorced	2 (1.4)
Other	4 (2.9)
Education level	140
Completed compulsory school	2 (1.4)
Completed high school	17 (12.1)
Completed vocational education	14 (10.0)
Bachelor’s degree/Master’s degree/dissertation	98 (70.0)
Other	9 (6.4)
Work	140
Part-time/full-time job, self-employed	68 (48.6)
Student	46 (32.9)
Unemployed or Other	26 (18.6)
Diagnosed psychiatric history	140
Current	14 (10.0)
Past	28 (20.0)
No history	96 (68.6)
Declined	2 (1.4)

Table 2. Descriptive statistics, internal consistencies and paired correlations of CARTS subscales for Not Applicable, Self, Mother and Father

		Not Applicable^a			Self^b			Mother^c			Father^d			Correlations
subscale (No. of items)	n	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	rbc	rbd	rcd
Positive (13)	126	.60	0.25	0.74	.80	0.75	1.62	.93	9.76**	4.04	.91	8.73	4.19	.17*	.14	.56**
ProximitySeek (4)	133	.80	0.29	0.82				.84	2.81**	1.49	.83	1.52	1.57			.42**
EmotAvailability (4)	135	.76	0.30	0.79				.88	2.86**	1.52	.83	1.86	1.59			.37**
Secure (8)	131	.89	0.60	1.56				.91	5.73**	2.82	.91	3.40	3.04			.41**
NegAffect (3)	128	.77	0.99	1.17	.71	0.34	0.76	.61	1.03**	1.06	.55	0.68	0.88	.18*	.24**	.17
PosAffect (1)	138	–	0.06	0.24	–	0.22	0.42	–	0.46	0.50	–	0.49	0.50	.13	.28**	.51**
NegFeelSelf (4)	131	.80	1.49	1.51				.79	1.22	1.42	.79	1.35	1.46			.25**
EmotAbuseSelf (2)	136	.80	1.02	0.92				.72	0.35	0.67	.82	0.28	0.64			.33**
EmotAbuseOthers (2)	138	.89	1.14	0.94	.91	0.09	0.39	.75	0.25	0.59	.94	0.37	0.76	.10	.14	.27**
NegRelateBeliefsFrom (5)	136	.86	3.41	1.81				.92	0.51	1.33	.87	0.48	1.19			.45**
NegRelateBeliefsTo (5)	132	.86	3.56	1.78	.96	0.14	0.76	.74	0.19	0.67	.72	0.31	0.83	−.02	.01	.20*
PhysAbuseSelf (2)	138	.38	1.51	0.68				.46	0.18	0.46	.16	0.14	0.37			.45**
PhysAbuseOthers (2)	136	.76	1.66	0.67	.65	0.06	0.29	.29	0.08	0.30	.60	0.17*	0.46	.37**	.42**	.49**
WitViolencebyMother (1)	140	–	0.91	0.29				–	0.00	0.00	–	0.03*	0.17			–
WitViolencebyFather (1)	140	–	0.85	0.36				–	0.10**	0.30	–	0.01	0.12			−.04
WitViolencebySiblings (2)	139	.56	1.96	0.22				.80	0.02	0.19	–	0.00	0.00			–
WitViolencetoMother (1)	139	–	0.79	0.41				–	0.00	0.00	–	0.13**	0.34			–
WitViolencetoFather (1)	140	–	0.91	0.28				–	0.04	0.19	–	0.01	0.09			−.02
WitViolencetoSiblings (2)	139	.35	1.88	0.36				.49	0.04	0.24	.43	0.05	0.25			.57**
PossibleAbuse (3)	139	.81	2.53	0.92				.75	0.18	0.58	.69	0.18	0.56			.57**
SexAbuse (6)	138	.91	5.58	1.28				–	0.01	0.09	.89	0.12*	0.69			.11

α = Kuder-Richardson-20; M = mean; SD = standard deviation; r = correlation coefficient.

*p < .05, one-tailed. **p < .01, one-tailed.

Table 3. Multiple regression analyses including the subscales of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form (CTQ-SF)

	Step 1	Step 2	Step 2
	Non Applicable Ratings	Mother- & Father-Ratings	Non Applicable Ratings	Mother-Ratings	Father-Ratings
DV	R^2	∆R^2	b (SE)	b (SE)	b (SE)
CTQ-EA	.35**	.14**	−1.90 (.47)**	2.80 (.60)**	1.74 (.61)**
CTQ-PA	.28**	.16**	−.49 (.34)	2.35 (.45)**	1.02 (.52)
CTQ-SA	.84**	.05**	−1.66 (.08)**	−2.89 (.95)**	1.15 (.15)**
CTQ-EN	.24**	.42**	Positive: .40 (.46)	Positive: −.36 (.11)**	Positive: −.24 (.10)
			Secure: .33 (.24)	Secure: −.52 (.16)**	Secure: −.00 (.12)

DV = dependent variable. CTQ-SF = Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form (Bernstein et al., 2003); EA = Emotional Abuse (predictor: CARTS subscale Emotional Abuse Self); PA = Physical Abuse (predictor: CARTS subscale Physical Abuse Self); SA = Sexual Abuse (predictor: CARTS subscale Sexual Abuse); EN = Emotional Neglect (predictors: CARTS subscales Positive/Secure).

**p < .01, two-tailed.

Table 4. Multiple regression analyses including the subscales of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI)

	Step 1	Step 2	Step 2
	Non Applicable Ratings	Mother/Father Ratings	Non Applicable Positive	Non Applicable Secure	Parent (M/F) Positive	Parent (M/F) Secure
DV	R^2	∆R^2	b (SE)	b (SE)	b (SE)	b (SE)
PBI-Care (M)	.11**	.53**	−1.35 (.93)	.70 (.52)	.73 (.20)**	1.64 (.31)**
PBI-Care (F)	.08	.50**	−1.73 (1.28)	.08 (.46)	1.10 (.17)**	.64 (.23)**
PBI-Over (M)	.05	.28**	.32 (1.05)	−.16 (.58)	−.75 (.23)**	−.47 (.35)
PBI-Over (F)	.08	.10**	2.05 (1.59)	.99 (.57)	−.65 (.21)**	.28 (.28)

DV = dependent variable; M = Mother/F = Father. PBI = Parental Bonding Instrument (Parker et al., 1979); Care = Parental Care; Over = Overprotection. Predictors are the CARTS subscales Positive and Secure.

**p < .01, two-tailed.

Table 5. Bivariate correlations between CARTS subscales of mother and father ratings and the GPS, BSI-18 and both subscales of the ECR-R

	Mother-Ratings		Father-Ratings
CARTS subscale	GPS	BSI-18	GPS	BSI-18
Positive	−.32**	−.33**	−.30**	−.30**
ProximitySeek	−.26**	−.28**	−.34**	−.30**
EmotAvailability	−.30**	−.29**	−.39**	−.34**
NegAffect	.15	.20*	.12	.17
PosAffect	−.20*	−.13	−.22**	−.20*
NegFeelSelf	.39**	.35**	.32**	.34**
EmotAbuseSelf	.30**	.36**	.28**	.30**
EmotAbuseOthers	.23**	.25**	.32**	.21*
NegRelateBeliefsFrom	.47**	.52**	.35**	.37**
NegRelateBeliefsTo	.29**	.32**	.23**	.16
PhysAbuseSelf	.27**	.33**	.20*	.22*
PhysAbuseOthers	.11	.21*	.31**	.19*
WitViolencebyMother	–	–	.18*	.16
WitViolencebyFather	.40**	.40**	.07	−.04
WitViolencebySiblings	.02	.01	–	–
WitViolencetoMother	–	–	.40**	.26**
WitViolencetoFather	.18*	.16	.02	.04
WitViolencetoSiblings	.20*	.31**	.38**	.29**
PossibleAbuse	.37**	.37**	.35**	.32**
SexAbuse	.26**	.17*	.13	.16
CARTS subscale	ECR-R Avoidance	ECR-R Anxiety	ECR-R Avoidance	ECR-R Anxiety
Positive	−.41**	−.28**	−.28**	−.28**
ProximitySeek	−.35**	−.33**	−.28**	−.35**
EmotAvailability	−.39**	−.28**	−.27**	−.29**
NegAffect	.14	.16	−.12	.07
PosAffect	−.25**	−.17	−.21*	−.15
NegFeelSelf	.35**	.35**	−.01	.28**
EmotAbuseSelf	.41**	.37**	.11	.26**
EmotAbuseOthers	.31**	.24**	.01	.16
NegRelateBeliefsFrom	.45**	.44**	.22*	.35**
NegRelateBeliefsTo	.33**	.42**	.04	.20*
PhysAbuseSelf	.33**	.39**	.11	.10
PhysAbuseOthers	.16	.15	.03	.08
WitViolencebyMother	–	–	.24**	.18*
WitViolencebyFather	.24**	.24**	−.10	.08
WitViolencebySiblings	−.02	.01	–	–
WitViolencetoMother	–	–	.07	.16
WitViolencetoFather	.21*	.28**	−.10	−.02
WitViolencetoSiblings	.11	.19*	.09	.14
PossibleAbuse	.42**	.37**	.28**	.23*
SexAbuse	.08	.12	.11	.17

*p < .05, two-tailed. **p < .01, two-tailed.

Table 6. Cross-cultural comparisons of CARTS subscales between German-speaking and Italian- and English-speaking student samples

	Sample – G	Sample – I			Sample – E
CARTS subscale	M (SD)	M (SD)	t	p^a	M (SD)	t	p^a
Not Applicable
Positive	0.20 (0.97)	0.11 (0.35)	0.59	.948	0.21 (1.08)	−0.07	.948
Secure	0.41 (1.25)	0.90 (0.82)	−2.62	.024	0.41 (1.44)	−0.01	.996
NegAffect	0.73 (1.05)	1.36 (0.82)	−3.83	<.001	1.66 (1.22)	−5.66	<.001
PosAffect	0.00 (0.00)	0.64 (0.48)	-	-	0.08 (0.27)	-	-
NegFeelSelf	1.14 (1.30)	3.43 (1.72)	−11.41	<.001	2.07 (1.61)	−4.63	<.001
EmotAbuseSelf	0.80 (0.91)	1.74 (0.57)	−6.98	<.001	1.32 (0.77)	−3.85	<.001
EmotAbuseOthers	1.00 (0.99)	1.45 (0.66)	−3.09	.006	1.36 (0.83)	−2.47	.017
NegRelateBeliefsFrom	2.98 (1.91)	4.23 (1.32)	−4.39	<.001	3.82 (1.67)	−2.95	.005
NegRelateBeliefsTo	3.30 (1.85)	4.40 (1.22)	−3.96	<.001	3.92 (1.69)	−2.24	.030
PhysAbuseSelf	1.41 (0.72)	1.92 (0.28)	−4.79	<.001	1.43 (0.77)	−0.16	.873
PhysAbuseOthers	1.58 (0.72)	1.92 (0.28)	−3.18	.006	1.58 (0.72)	−0.02	.984
PossibleAbuse	2.41 (0.93)	2.89 (0.46)	−3.47	.002	2.74 (0.75)	−2.38	.022
SexAbuse	5.52 (1.36)	4.85 (0.83)	3.35	.004	5.86 (0.75)	−1.68	.099
Self
Positive	0.70 (1.47)	1.19 (2.63)	−2.11	.084	0.87 (1.08)	−0.73	.469
Secure	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
NegAffect	0.56 (1.05)	0.24 (0.62)	1.96	.057	0.17 (0.50)	2.38	.044
PosAffect	0.30 (0.47)	0.24 (0.43)	0.94	.509	0.35 (0.48)	−0.67	.509
NegFeelSelf	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
EmotAbuseSelf	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
EmotAbuseOthers	0.20 (0.58)	0.00 (0.00)	2.28	.054	0.06 (0.34)	1.58	.121
NegRelateBeliefsFrom	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
NegRelateBeliefsTo	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
PhysAbuseSelf	–	.–	–	–	–	–	–
PhysAbuseOthers	0.04 (0.21)	0.14 (0.12)	−3.08	.008	0.03 (0.24)	0.47	.644
PossibleAbuse	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
SexAbuse	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Mother
Positive	10.25 (4.09)	9.40 (3.75)	1.31	.329	10.89 (3.17)	−0.99	.329
Secure	6.02 (2.64)	5.77 (2.54)	0.64	.694	6.18 (2.61)	−0.40	.694
NegAffect	1.22 (1.13)	0.36 (0.72)	4.87	<.001	0.40 (0.73)	4.65	<.001
PosAffect	0.52 (0.51)	n. s.	–	–	0.61 (0.49)	−1.19	.242
NegFeelSelf	1.52 (1.45)	0.55 (1.22)	4.35	<.001	0.69 (1.19)	3.72	.001
EmotAbuseSelf	0.37 (0.68)	0.11 (0.42)	2.60	.013	0.11 (0.46)	2.60	.013
EmotAbuseOthers	0.17 (0.49)	0.08 (0.36)	1.31	.392	0.16 (0.53)	0.19	.847
NegRelateBeliefsFrom	0.56 (1.42)	0.31 (0.86)	1.16	.253	0.16 (0.61)	1.87	.138
NegRelateBeliefsTo	0.25 (0.65)	0.12 (0.64)	1.32	.193	0.09 (0.46)	1.63	.193
PhysAbuseSelf	0.17 (0.44)	0.05 (0.23)	1.92	.122	0.19 (0.42)	−0.25	.804
PhysAbuseOthers	0.07 (0.25)	0.04 (0.20)	0.71	.482	0.11 (0.35)	−1.15	.482
PossibleAbuse	0.22 (0.63)	0.03 (0.16)	2.02	.049	0.03 (0.19)	2.02	.049
SexAbuse	0.00 (0.00)	0.01 (0.12)	-	-	0.00 (0.00)	-	-
Father
Positive	9.18 (4.47)	8.47 (4.22)	1.00	.648	9.37 (4.17)	−0.28	.784
Secure	3.41 (3.08)	3.89 (3.19)	−1.04	.305	4.18 (3.05)	−1.66	.208
NegAffect	0.83 (0.97)	0.18 (0.49)	4.28	<.001	0.38 (0.71)	2.96	.005
PosAffect	0.52 (0.51)	0.54 (0.50)	−0.25	.807	0.56 (0.50)	−0.51	.807
NegFeelSelf	1.48 (1.47)	0.34 (1.01)	5.01	<.001	1.03 (1.40)	1.97	.056
EmotAbuseSelf	0.37 (0.71)	0.06 (0.29)	2.96	.010	0.21 (0.60)	1.52	.135
EmotAbuseOthers	0.50 (0.84)	0.04 (0.26)	3.73	.002	0.35 (0.73)	1.22	.230
NegRelateBeliefsFrom	0.51 (1.14)	0.23 (0.77)	1.65	.210	0.40 (1.02)	0.65	.517
NegRelateBeliefsTo	0.41 (0.97)	0.12 (0.53)	1.97	.110	0.32 (1.02)	0.61	.546
PhysAbuseSelf	0.15 (0.42)	0.06 (0.23)	1.49	.215	0.23 (0.49)	−1.26	.215
PhysAbuseOthers	0.13 (0.41)	0.04 (0.21)	1.55	.258	0.19 (0.52)	−0.94	.352
PossibleAbuse	0.15 (0.52)	0.03 (0.17)	1.61	.230	0.08 (0.41)	0.95	.347
SexAbuse	0.11 (0.53)	0.01 (0.12)	1.27	.259	0.02 (0.21)	1.14	.259

Sample – I = Italian-speaking sample (Simonelli et al., 2017; n = , p. 79), Sample – E = English-speaking sample (Frewen et al., 2013; n = , p. 222), Sample – G = German-speaking student subsample (n = 46), n. s. = not specified, M = Mean, SD = standard deviation, p^a adjusted with FDR (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995).

Bernstein, D. P., Stein, J. A., Newcomb, M. D., Walker, E., Pogge, D., Ahluvalia, T., … Desmond, D. (2003). Development and validation of a brief screening version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. Child Abuse & Neglect, 27, 169–190. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(02)00541-0.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 1–10. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8341.1979.tb02487.x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Simonelli, A., Sacchi, C., Cantoni, L., Brown, M., & Frewen, P. (2017). Italian translation and cross-cultural comparison with the Childhood Attachment and Relational Trauma Screen (CARTS). European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 8, 1–13. doi:10.1080/20008198.2017.1375839.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Frewen, P. A., Evans, B., Goodman, J., Halliday, A., Boylan, J., Moran, G., … Lanius, R. A. (2013). Development of a Childhood Attachment and Relational Trauma Screen (CARTS): A relational-socioecological framework for surveying attachment security and childhood trauma history. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 4, 1–17. doi:10.3402/ejpt.v4i0.20232.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 57, 289–300. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, Brigitte Lueger-Schuster. The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.