Developing a Valid and Reliable Cross-cultural Measure of Coparenting Conflict between Divorced Parents: The Portuguese Version of the Acrimony Scale.

Coparenting conflict is predictive of parents' and children's adjustment to divorce. An accurate assessment of postdivorce acrimonious coparenting relationships is critical for research, clinical, forensic, and public policy purposes. The Acrimony Scale (AS) is a measure commonly used to assess coparenting conflict. We translated and cross-culturally adapted the AS to the Portuguese context, testing its reliability and validity. Using a web-based survey, data were collected from a community and convenience sample of 196 unrelated divorced parents, assessing sociodemographic characteristics, coparenting conflict, and divorce adjustment. The study consisted of two phases: (1) forward-backward translation and cultural adaptation and (2) psychometric properties analyses: construct and criterion-related validity and internal consistency reliability. The 25-item AS was successfully translated and cross-culturally adapted to the Portuguese language. Principal component analyses (PCA) suggested a three-factor structure solution of 22-items, explaining 57.5% of the variance. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed the goodness of fit of this tridimensional model. The results also demonstrated acceptable convergent and good discriminant validity and high internal reliability. Scores on the AS suggested good known-groups validity and high discriminative power with 86.7% classification accuracy. The area under the ROC curve was 0.91, establishing a very good predictive value of the scale. We suggest that the AS is a reliable multidimensional measure to assess coparenting conflict after divorce and may be useful, namely, in the psychological assessment of child custody and evaluation of the effectiveness of coparenting conflict-based interventions. We discussed future research and practical implications.

Vitimação múltipla feminina ao longo da vida: uma revisão sistemática da literatura / Lifetime multiple victimization among women:a systematic review of the literature

No contexto internacional assistimos a um crescente reconhecimento científico de que as mulheres, vítimas preferenciais de diferentes formas de vitimação, tendem a coo-experienciar outras formas de vitimação ao longo da vida. Neste artigo realizamos uma revisão sistemática da literatura existente sobre a vitimação múltipla de mulheres ao longo da vida. Conclui-se que predominam os estudos quantitativos de natureza transversal, retrospectivos e com designs descritivos correlacionais, centrados na vitimação múltipla interpessoal, nomeadamente, íntima. Os inventários de autorrelato e as entrevistas semiestruturadas são os instrumentos mais frequentes para avaliar o fenómeno, recorrendo, maioritariamente, a amostras por conveniência, recrutadas em contexto normativo (universitário) ou forense. A prevalência, embora elevada, oscila entre os estudos, reflexo das diferentes amostras e instrumentos utilizados. Quanto ao impacto, os estudos são consensuais na ideia de que quanto maior a vitimação cumulativa, maior o impacto (efeito dose). Finalmente, apresentamos os principais contributos e limitações que derivam desta revisão sistemática.

There is an increasing scientific recognition that women, primary victims of different forms of interpersonal victimization, tend to co-experience other forms of victimization throughout lifetime. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of publications on lifetime multiple victimization of women. We found predominantly cross-sectional studies, retrospective and correlational designs, directed to study multiple interpersonal violence, particularly intimate abuse. Self-report inventories and semi-structured interviews were the most commonly strategies used to evaluate the problem, and the most frequent sampling option was convenience samples, recruited in normative (university) or forensic contexts. The prevalence of multiple victimization reported by women, although high, varied between studies, reflecting the different samples and evaluation tools. In terms of impact, the studies were consensual on the idea that the greater the cumulative victimization the greater impact victimization would produce. Finally, we present the main contributions and limitations that draw from this systematic review.

Vitimação múltipla feminina ao longo da vida: uma revisão sistemática da literatura / Lifetime multiple victimization among women:a systematic review of the literature

No contexto internacional assistimos a um crescente reconhecimento científico de que as mulheres, vítimas preferenciais de diferentes formas de vitimação, tendem a coo-experienciar outras formas de vitimação ao longo da vida. Neste artigo realizamos uma revisão sistemática da literatura existente sobre a vitimação múltipla de mulheres ao longo da vida. Conclui-se que predominam os estudos quantitativos de natureza transversal, retrospectivos e com designs descritivos correlacionais, centrados na vitimação múltipla interpessoal, nomeadamente, íntima. Os inventários de autorrelato e as entrevistas semiestruturadas são os instrumentos mais frequentes para avaliar o fenómeno, recorrendo, maioritariamente, a amostras por conveniência, recrutadas em contexto normativo (universitário) ou forense. A prevalência, embora elevada, oscila entre os estudos, reflexo das diferentes amostras e instrumentos utilizados. Quanto ao impacto, os estudos são consensuais na ideia de que quanto maior a vitimação cumulativa, maior o impacto (efeito dose). Finalmente, apresentamos os principais contributos e limitações que derivam desta revisão sistemática.(AU)

There is an increasing scientific recognition that women, primary victims of different forms of interpersonal victimization, tend to co-experience other forms of victimization throughout lifetime. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of publications on lifetime multiple victimization of women. We found predominantly cross-sectional studies, retrospective and correlational designs, directed to study multiple interpersonal violence, particularly intimate abuse. Self-report inventories and semi-structured interviews were the most commonly strategies used to evaluate the problem, and the most frequent sampling option was convenience samples, recruited in normative (university) or forensic contexts. The prevalence of multiple victimization reported by women, although high, varied between studies, reflecting the different samples and evaluation tools. In terms of impact, the studies were consensual on the idea that the greater the cumulative victimization the greater impact victimization would produce. Finally, we present the main contributions and limitations that draw from this systematic review.(AU)