BackgroundChildhood maltreatment contributes to a large mental health burden worldwide. Different measures of childhood maltreatment are not equivalent and may capture meaningful differences. In particular, prospective and retrospective measures of maltreatment identify different groups of individuals and are differentially associated with psychopathology. However, the reasons behind these discrepancies have not yet been comprehensively mapped.MethodsIn this review, we draw on multi‐disciplinary research and present an integrated framework to explain maltreatment measurement disagreement.ResultsWe identified three interrelated domains. First, methodological issues related to measurement and data collection methods. Second, the role of memory in influencing retrospective reports of maltreatment. Finally, the motivations individuals may have to disclose, withhold, or fabricate information about maltreatment.ConclusionsA greater understanding of maltreatment measurement disagreement may point to new ways to conceptualise and assess maltreatment. Furthermore, it may help uncover mechanisms underlying maltreatment‐related psychopathology and targets for novel interventions.

中文翻译：

---

研究综述：为什么虐待的前瞻性和回顾性测量不同？叙述性回顾


背景童年虐待在世界范围内造成了巨大的心理健康负担。不同的儿童虐待衡量标准并不等同，可能会捕捉到有意义的差异。特别是，虐待的前瞻性和回顾性测量确定了不同的个体群体，并且与精神病理学的相关性不同。然而，这些差异背后的原因尚未得到全面映射。方法在这篇综述中，我们借鉴了多学科研究，并提出了一个综合框架来解释虐待测量的不一致。结果我们确定了三个相互关联的领域。首先，与测量和数据收集方法相关的方法问题。其次，记忆在影响虐待回顾性报告方面的作用。最后，个人可能不得不披露、隐瞒或捏造有关虐待的信息的动机。结论对虐待测量不一致的更深入理解可能为概念化和评估虐待提供新的方法。此外，它可能有助于揭示与虐待相关的精神病理学的潜在机制和新干预措施的目标。