Epstein Secrets

losure latency, with victims being at higher risk for delayed dis- closure if there is a close relation with the assailant (Kogan. 2004: Koss 1988: Rickert, Wiemann, & Vaughan, 2005). In contrast, delayed disclosure is less common in victims of a stereotypical rape. i.e., rape by a stranger including a

iably distinguished between early and delayed disclosers (g2 (3) =23.09. p <0.000). There were no significant interac- tions between the predictors. Nagelkerke's R2 of 10.5% suggests only a modest association between the predic- tors and delayed disclosure. although the model did show an adequate fit to th

osure latency, with victims being at higher risk for delayed dis- closure if there is a close relation with the assailant (Kogan, 2004; Koss, 1988; Rickert, Wiemann, & Vaughan, 2005). In contrast, delayed disclosure is less common in victims of a stereotypical rape, i.e., rape by a stranger including a

liably distinguished between early and delayed disclosers (x2 (3) =2309, p <0.000). There were no significant interac- tions between the predictors. Nagelkerke's R2 of 10.5% suggests only a modest association between the predic- tors and delayed disclosure, although the model did show an adequate fit to th

osure latency, with victims being at higher risk for delayed dis- closure if there is a close relation with the assailant (Kogan, 2004; Koss, 1988; Rickert, Wiemann, & Vaughan, 2005). In contrast, delayed disclosure is less common in victims of a stereotypical rape, i.e., rape by a stranger including a

bly distinguished between early and delayed disclosers (2 2 (3) = 23.09, p <0.000). There were no significant interac- tions between the predictors. Nagelkerke's R2 of 10.5% suggests only a modest association between the predic- tors and delayed disclosure, although the model did show an adequate fit to th