Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (Bernstain et al., 1994)

Prevalence of physical abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse in adolescents, young adults, and adults; 35 items / 5-18 item subscales, Ages 14-19
  • Populations: Turkish Adolescents, Chinese Adolescents, American Adults
  • Age ranges: 14 - 19; 24-68
  • Languages: Turkish, Chinese, English, Spanish
  • Countries: Spain; Turkey

Items

Subscales:

  • physical abuse, 12 items 
  • emotional abuse, 18 items
  • sexual abuse, 5 items

Short Form Subscales:

  • Sexual Abuse, 5 Items
  • Emotional Abuse, 5 Items
  • Physical Abuse, 5 Items
  • Emotional Neglect, 5 Items
  • Physical Neglect, 5 Items

Full Scale not reported, example items:

  • I was punished with a belt, a board, a cord, or some other hard object (physical abuse)
  • People in my family called me things like ‘stupid’, ‘lazy’, or ‘ugly’” (emotional abuse)
  • Someone tried to touch me in a sexual way, or tried to make me touch them (sexual abuse)

 

“Each traumatic experience is rated on a 7-point scale of frequency and severity; objective scoring criteria and examples are provided in a manual” (Bernstain et al., 1994)

Scoring

Short form Scoring

“Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 5 (almost always). Some of the items are written in reverse (shown Table 1 in as item number followed by “R”), so those must be recoded before calculating the scores (5=1 and 1=5). There is a total score and independent scores for the five subscales. Therefore, the total score ranges from 25 to 125 and the subscale scores from 5 to 25. According to the original manual, the 
cut-off values of the CTQ-SF subscales classify severity into four 
levels, from “none” to “extreme” (Bernstein et al., 2003)” (García-Fernández et al., 2024)

Citations

  • Bernstein, D, Fink, L., Handelsman, L., Foote, J., Lovejoy, M., Wenzel, K., Sapareto, E., Ruggiero, J. (1994). Initial reliability and validity of a new retrospective measure of child abuse and neglect. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151(8), 1132-1136. https://doi-org.ezproxy1.lib.gla.ac.uk/10.1176/ajp.151.8.1132
  • WEKERLE, C., WOLFE, D. A., HAWKINS, D. L., PITTMAN, A., GLICKMAN, A., & LOVALD, B. E. (2001). Childhood maltreatment, posttraumatic stress symptomatology, and adolescent dating violence: Considering the value of adolescent perceptions of abuse and a trauma mediational model. Development and Psychopathology, 13(4), 847-871. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579401004060
  • Rezan, A., & Erogul, Ç. (2012). Psychometric Properties of Turkish Version of Childhood Trauma Questionnaire among Adolescents with Gender Differences. Psychology, 03(10), 916–922. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.310138
  • Peng, C., Cheng, J., Rong, F., Wang, Y., & Yu, Y. (2023). Psychometric properties and normative data of the childhood trauma questionnaire-short form in Chinese adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1130683. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1130683
  • García-Fernández A, Martínez-Cao C, Sánchez-Fernández-Quejo A, Bobes-Bascarán T, Andreo-Jover J, Ayad-Ahmed W, Cebriá AI, Díaz-Marsá M, Garrido-Torres N, Gómez S, González-Pinto A, Grande I, Iglesias N, March KB, Palao DJ, Pérez-Díez I, Roberto N, Ruiz-Veguilla M, de la Torre-Luque A, Zorrilla I, Pérez V, SURVIVE Group, Sáiz PA and García-Portilla MP (2024) Validation of the Spanish Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form in adolescents with suicide attempts. Front. Psychol. 15:1378486. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.137848

Team comments

This measure also has a Short Form we collected validation for in the Spanish language. (García-Fernández et al., 2024)

The Internal Consistency rating of the Short form Physical Neglect subscale did not reach our threshold for adequacy.

Scoring breakdown

Measure development

  • Significant design input from young people
  • Cognitive interviews with young people
  • Expert input

Validity

  • Unknown: Face validity
  • Green: Convergent validity
  • Green: Construct validity

Reliability

  • Green: Internal consistency
  • Green: Test-retest

Ease of use

  • Unknown: Readability

Definitions

Face validity: How well a measure appears to represent the construct it is supposed to be measuring.

Convergent validity: How well a measure correlates with other hypothetically-related measures.

Construct validity: The extent to which a measure reflects the construct it was designed to evaluate.

Internal consistency: The extent to which items in a scale capture aspects of the same construct.

Test-retest: The degree to which measurement scores are consistent over a short period of time (usually 2 weeks).

Readability: The ease with which a reader can understand the questionnaire items.

Key

  • Green: Meets validation criteria
  • Red: Does not meet validation criteria
  • Unknown: Evidence not available

Categories

Start a new search

Loading