Epstein Secrets

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

ization is most likely to occur during adolescence. as compared to childhood or young adulthood, and greatly increases the risk of revictimization (Humphrey & White. 2000). Hence, victims of rape by peers may be a target group for interventions promoting early disclosure. Clearly, there are many variables work

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

ization is most likely to occur during adolescence, as compared to childhood or young adulthood, and greatly increases the risk of revictimization (Humphrey & White, 2000). Hence, victims of rape by peers may be a target group for interventions promoting early disclosure. Clearly, there are many variables work

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

ization is most likely to occur during adolescence, as compared to childhood or young adulthood, and greatly increases the risk of revictimization (Humphrey & White, 2000). Hence, victims of rape by peers may be a target group for interventions promoting early disclosure. Clearly, there are many variables work