Epstein Secrets

tors influencing CSA disclosure have served the field well but are no longer current. Important contributions on CSA disclosures include Paine and Hansen's (2002) original review covering the liter- ature largely from the premillennium era, followed by London, Bruck, Ceci, and Shuman's (2005) subseque

sampling was for the most part convenience based, relying on voluntary par- ticipation in surveys and consent-based participation in file reviews (Collings, Griffiths, & Kumalo, 2005; Priebe & Sve- din, 2008; Schonbucher et al., 2012; Ungar, Barter, McConnell, Tutty, & Fairholm, 2009a). Therefore, generalizability of find-

tors influencing CSA disclosure have served the field well but are no longer current. Important contributions on CSA disclosures include Paine and Hansen's (2002) original review covering the liter- ature largely from the premillennium era, followed by London, Bruck, Ceci, and Shuman's (2005) subseque

sampling was for the most part convenience based, relying on voluntary par- ticipation in surveys and consent-based participation in file reviews (Collings, Griffiths, & Kumalo, 2005; Priebe & Sve- din, 2008; Schonbucher et al., 2012; Ungar, Barter, McConnell, Tutty, & Fairholm, 2009a). Therefore, generalizability of find-

tors influencing CSA disclosure have served the field well but are no longer current. Important contributions on CSA disclosures include Paine and Hansen's (2002) original review covering the liter- ature largely from the premillennium era, followed by London, Bruck, Ceci, and Shuman's (2005) subseque

sampling was for the most part convenience based, relying on voluntary par- ticipation in surveys and consent-based participation in file reviews (Collings, Griffiths, & Kumalo, 2005; Priebe & Sve- din, 2008; Schembucher et al., 2012; Ungar, Barter, McConnell, Tutty, & Fairholm, 2009a). Therefore, generalizability of find-