Assessing the family dynamics of childhood maltreatment history with the Childhood Attachment and Relational Trauma Screen (CARTS)

Figures & data

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of full MTurk sample (n=1,782)

	MTurk participants
Variable	N (%) or M (SD)
Age	33.96 (11.54)
Sex
Female	1,220 (67.9)
Male	554 (31.4)
Declined	8 (0.7)
Race
Caucasian	1,381 (77.5)
Mixed race selected	133 (7.5)
Any other specific race selected (e.g., Northeast Asian)	96 (5.4)
Other race selected	111 (6.2)
Declined	61 (3.4)
Marital status
Single	787 (44.2)
Married or common-law	732 (41.1)
Divorced or separated	182 (10.2)
Widowed	14 (0.8)
Other	48 (2.7)
Declined	19 (1.1)
Education level (highest attained):
Completed post-secondary	971 (54.5)
Completed high school	154 (8.6)
Partially completed post-secondary	632 (35.5)
Did not complete high school	14 (0.8)
Declined	11 (0.6)
Employment
Full- or part-time	949 (53.3)
Unemployed	279 (15.7)
Student	221 (12.4)
Self-employed	187 (10.5)
Unable to work	84 (4.7)
Other	47 (2.6)
Declined	15 (0.8)
Diagnosed psychiatric history
No history of psychiatric diagnosis	927 (52.0)
Current psychological diagnosis	453 (25.4)
Past psychiatric diagnosis	344 (19.3)
Declined	58 (3.3)
Family description
Includes one brother	640 (46.9)
Includes one sister	555 (40.7)
Includes more than one brother	368 (27.0)
Includes more than one sister	272 (19.9)

Table 2 Descriptive statistics, paired mean comparisons, and paired correlations across all MTurk participants (n=1,782) for not applicable, self, biological mother, and biological father ratings

	Not applicable (a)			Self (b)			Mother (c)			Father (d)			Correlations
Scale (# of items)	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	r bc	r bd	r cd
Positive (13)	.87	0.60	1.71	.90	1.88	3.03	.93	9.27**	4.18	.94	7.85	4.63	.15**	.20**	.43**
Proximity (4)	.86	0.46	1.07				.87	2.34**	1.65	.86	1.38	1.57			.30**
Helps me (4)	.87	0.44	1.05				.89	2.40**	1.69	.89	1.62	1.67			.35**
N-affect (3)	.80	0.76	1.10	.69	0.53	0.87	.66	1.08**	1.10	.63	0.78	0.95	.09**	.08**	.19**
Pos. affect (1)	–	0.09	0.29	–	0.26	0.44	–	0.42**	0.49	–	0.37	0.48	.28**	.29**	.43**
N-feelings from	.89	1.10	1.52				.88	1.25	1.59	.89	1.58**	1.68			.21**
E-Ab to self (2)	.85	0.67	0.88				.86	0.42	0.77	.87	0.46	0.80			.14**
E-Ab to others (2)	.88	0.89	0.93	.69	0.06	0.30	.90	0.36	0.73	.88	0.50**	0.82	.16**	.10**	.22**
N-beliefs from (5)	.90	2.19	2.08				.91	0.91	1.63	.89	1.06**	1.68			.22**
N-beliefs to (5)	.91	2.52	2.13				.90	0.52	1.29	.92	0.93**	1.69			.17**
P-Ab to self (2)	.73	1.56	1.23				.48	0.53	0.90	.64	0.69**	1.03			.28**
P-Ab to others (2)	.81	1.18	0.89	.85	0.04	0.26	.60	0.25	0.55	.77	0.43**	0.73	.11**	.06**	.22**
Wit-V by mom (1)	–	0.71	0.45				–	–	–	–	0.10	0.30			–
Wit-V by dad (1)	–	0.63	0.48				–	0.22	0.42	–	–	–			–
Wit-V by sibs. (2)	.50	1.75	0.54				.12	0.05	0.24	.31	0.04	0.23			.34**
Wit-V to mom (1)	–	0.64	0.48				–	–	–	–	0.24	0.43			–
Wit-V to dad (1)	–	0.79	0.41				–	0.11	0.32	–	–	–			–
Wit-V to sibs. (2)	.59	1.56	0.70				.54	0.14	0.43	.56	0.22**	0.52			.31**
Possible abuse (3)	.87	2.22	1.17				.76	0.15	0.53	.85	0.23**	0.69			.22**
Sexual abuse (6)	.96	5.15	1.92				.93	0.04	0.41	.97	0.21**	1.01			.10**

*p<.05, **p<.01. Note that significance level was not corrected for number of comparisons. Ab=abuse; N=negative; P=physical; Pos.=positive; V=violence; Wit=witness.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics for brothers and sisters, and paired comparisons with mother and father ratings, across all MTurk participants (n=1,364)

	Younger brother			Older brother			Younger sister			Older sister
Scale (# of items)	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	α	M	SD	α	M	SD
Positive (13)	.88	6.26^ac	3.76	.91	5.74^ac	4.10	.91	6.49^ac	4.06	.93	6.46^ac	4.52
Proximity (4)	.82	0.60^ac	1.15	.85	0.76^ac	1.30	.86	0.73^ac	1.30	.89	1.15^a	1.56
Helps me (4)	.89	0.74^ac	1.35	.88	0.93^ac	1.45	.88	0.85^ac	1.41	.90	1.30^a	1.63
N-affect (3)	.49	0.41^ac	0.70	.65	0.45^ac	0.81	.61	0.49^ac	0.83	.69	0.64^a	0.96
Pos affect (1)	–	0.50^bd	0.50	–	0.44^d	0.50	–	0.54^bd	0.50	–	0.48^d	0.50
N-feelings from (4)	.76	0.65^ac	1.11	.86	1.05^c	1.46	.77	0.73^ac	1.16	.82	0.95^c	1.35
E-Ab to self (2)	.84	0.44	0.76	.85	0.65^bd	0.87	.87	0.42	0.76	.84	0.60^bd	0.85
E-Ab to others (2)	.85	0.16^ac	0.51	.88	0.31^c	0.68	.82	0.22^ac	0.57	.82	0.28^c	0.64
N-beliefs from (5)	.85	0.56^ac	1.26	.87	1.00	1.61	.88	0.71^ac	1.42	.90	1.22^b	1.82
N-beliefs to (5)	.83	0.36^ac	1.00	.92	0.66^b	1.47	.86	0.38^ac	1.07	.88	0.56^bc	1.29
P-Ab to self (2)	.80	0.50^c	0.94	.81	0.65^b	1.05	.74	0.36^ac	0.78	.82	0.38^c	0.84
P-Ab to others (2)	.81	0.21^ac	0.56	.94	0.30^bc	0.70	.76	0.17^ac	0.50	.85	0.18^c	0.54
Possible abuse (3)	.71	0.04^ac	0.31	.88	0.27^b	0.78	.75	0.04^ac	0.27	.88	0.14	0.57
Sexual abuse (6)	.95	0.04^c	0.41	.94	0.27^b	1.10	.80	0.02^c	0.27	.93	0.11	0.71

^aSignificantly lower compared to mean score of mother, p<.05; ^bSignificantly higher compared to mean score of mother, p<.05; ^cSignificantly lower compared to mean score of father, p<.05; ^dSignificantly higher compared to mean score of father. Significance level not corrected for number of comparisons.

Table 4 Frequency of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse across various nuclear-, extra-, and non-familial relationships

		Emotional abuse		Physical abuse		Sexual abuse
Relationship type	Total entered	n	%	n	%	n	%
Biological father	1,782	412	23.1	530	29.7	69	3.9
Biological mother	1,782	383	21.5	445	25.0	20	1.1
Brother	1,458	369	20.7	311	17.5	57	3.2
Sister	1,178	267	15.0	175	9.8	19	1.1
Nuclear family aggregate	n/a	1,077	60.4	969	54.4	160	9.0
Grandfather	423	14	0.8	14	0.8	9	0.5
Grandmother	646	53	3.0	38	2.1	4	0.2
Step-father	201	68	3.8	53	3.0	37	2.1
Step-mother	111	38	2.1	21	1.2	2	0.1
Mother's partner	43	21	1.2	12	0.7	7	0.4
Father's partner	13	3	0.2	2	0.1	0	0
Uncle	437	32	1.8	15	0.8	28	1.6
Aunt	500	32	1.8	12	0.7	12	0.7
Extra-familial aggregate	n/a	213	12.0	145	8.1	85	4.8
Teacher	45	3	0.2	2	0.1	4	0.2
Doctor	9	0	0	0	0	1	0.1
Coach	5	1	0.1	0	0	0	0
Religious person	23	0	0	0	0	2	0.1
Non-familial aggregate	n/a	4	0.2	2	0.1	6	0.3

Frequency was calculated as a total of whether a person endorsed experiencing any amount of emotional, physical, or sexual abuse (i.e., a score of 1 on any item in the scale). If multiple persons were entered for a particular category (e.g., sister), any abuse committed by any entered person was tallied. Percentages were calculated as the Total/1,782.

Table 5 Multiple regression analyses of CARTS convergent validity with the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire, and the childhood trauma screen

		Step 1: Non-applicable ratings	Step 2: Mother & father ratings		Non-applicable ratings	Mother ratings	Father ratings
Dependent measure	Sub-sample	R ^2	ΔR ^2	(CARTS predictor)	b (SE)	b (SE)	b (SE)
CTQ-EA	1	.10**	.05**	EA	−.20 (.32)**	.18 (.37)**	.22 (.34)**
CTQ-PA	1	.08**	.02**	PA	−.19 (.20)**	−.003 (.22)	.17 (.21)**
CTQ-SA	1	.19**	.01	SA	−.40 (.13)**	−.02 (.46)	.09 (.24)*
JVQ-M	2	0.45**	.09**	EA	−.20 (.40)**	.23 (.52)**	.18 (.48)**
				PA	−.26 (.33)**	.10 (.50)	−.02 (.41)
				SA	−.18 (.19)**	−.14 (.70)**	−.002 (.31)
CTQ-S-EA	3	.002	.15**	EA	−.11 (.08)	.44 (.09)**	.55 (.09)**
CTQ-S PA	3	.003	.21**	PA	−.04 (.05)	.23 (.07)**	.33 (.05)**
CTQ-S SA	3	.001	.19**	SA	−.03 (.03)	.14 (.16)**	.40 (.06)**

CTQ=Childhood Trauma Questionnaire; CTQ-S=Childhood trauma screen; JVQ-M=Juvenile victimization questionnaire-maltreatment scale; EA=Emotional abuse; PA=Physical abuse; SA=Sexual abuse. Prediction equations of CTQ scales correspond to CARTS scale for the specific form of abuse; for example, CTQ-EA predicted with CARTS emotional abuse to self-scale for a given family member. **p<.01, *p<.05.

Table 6 Correlations between CARTS subscales and PCL-5 total scores separately for each assessed relationship

	Total completed	Positive	Proximity seeking	Helping	Neg. affect	Pos. affect	Neg. feel. to	Emot. abuse self	Emot. abuse others	Relate. beliefs from	Relate. beliefs to	Phys. abuse self	Phys. abuse others	Possible abuse	Sexual abuse
Not-applicable	1,685	.03	.01	.03	−.16**	.02	−.17**	−.13**	−.13**	−.17**	−.15**	−.11**	−.12**	−.15**	−.14**
Self	1,685	−.11**			.17**	−.13**			.05				.05
Mother	1,685	−.20**	−.16**	−.18**	.15**	−.14**	.16**	.13**	.11**	.20**	.19**	.12**	.10**	.09**	.06
Father	1,685	−.16**	−.10**	−.12**	.17**	−.11**	.14**	.13**	.11**	.19**	.13**	.13**	.12**	.14**	.14**
Younger brother	417	−.20**	−.05	−.06	.02	−.05	.12*	.05	.07	.11	.05	.01	.04	.07	.08
Older brother	478	−.06	.02	−.01	.08	−.07	.11	.09	.11	.11	.18**	.10	.09	.14**	.03
Younger sister	376	−.10	.01	−.01	.14**	−.20**	.24**	.16**	.22**	.24**	.23**	.22**	.18**	.06	.07
Older sister	395	−.10	−.05	.01	.01	.01	.03	.05	−.01	.07	−.01	.01	.01	.10	.18**
Nuclear family aggregate	1,627							.11**				.08**			.13**
Grandfather	303							.03				.06			.06
Grandmother	443							.10**				−.08			.04
Step-father	171							.14*				.20**			.07
Step-mother	99							−.01				.12			−.01
Mother's partner	38							.24				.33**			.08
Father's partner	12							.23				.19			–
Uncle	242							.16**				.12*			.19**
Aunt	268							−.03				.07			.04
Extra-familial aggregate	653							.08*				.09*			.08*
Nonfamilial aggregate	41							−.14				.03			−.01

Total completed column refers to those who entered both the relationship category of the CARTS and the PCL. *p<.05, **p<.01. Aggregate variables are summed scores and include the same categories as presented in Table 4.