Pub Date : 2025-12-29DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102261
Osnat Zamir
Revictimization, the tendency of individuals who experienced childhood maltreatment to have violent relationships in adulthood, is well-documented. However, the theory explaining revictimization mechanisms and protective processes remains underdeveloped. This work extends the Couple Adaptation to Traumatic Stress (CATS) model to specify pathways from childhood maltreatment to revictimization and protective processes, integrating advances in three areas: (a) complex trauma, (b) protective processes, and (c) dyadic risk and protective mechanisms. A focused review of recent literature, prioritizing systematic reviews and meta-analyses, offers partial support for the proposed model and underscores the need for continued scholarship on trauma-informed, multilevel dyadic mechanisms for revictimization and protective processes.
{"title":"From inevitable destiny to resilience: A trauma-informed dyadic model of revictimization and relationship resilience","authors":"Osnat Zamir","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102261","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102261","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Revictimization, the tendency of individuals who experienced childhood maltreatment to have violent relationships in adulthood, is well-documented. However, the theory explaining revictimization mechanisms and protective processes remains underdeveloped. This work extends the Couple Adaptation to Traumatic Stress (CATS) model to specify pathways from childhood maltreatment to revictimization and protective processes, integrating advances in three areas: (a) complex trauma, (b) protective processes, and (c) dyadic risk and protective mechanisms. A focused review of recent literature, prioritizing systematic reviews and meta-analyses, offers partial support for the proposed model and underscores the need for continued scholarship on trauma-informed, multilevel dyadic mechanisms for revictimization and protective processes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102261"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145894015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-29DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102256
Brian G. Ogolsky, Jennifer L. Hardesty, Maya L. Carter
This paper applies the social-ecological framework to understanding intimate partner violence (IPV) as a multilayered phenomenon shaped by individual, relational, community, and sociocultural factors. At the individual level, early trauma, mental health, and personality traits influence IPV risk. Relational dynamics such as power, control, and post-separation abuse further shape patterns of violence. Community factors including neighborhood disadvantage, institutional failures, and limited service access create additional vulnerability. At the societal level, gender norms, patriarchy, and structural inequalities sustain IPV through cultural acceptance and legal inconsistencies. By integrating research across levels, we highlight the necessity of context to develop comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and culturally-informed prevention and intervention strategies that address the complex ecology of IPV.
{"title":"The social-ecological framework for understanding intimate partner violence","authors":"Brian G. Ogolsky, Jennifer L. Hardesty, Maya L. Carter","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102256","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102256","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper applies the social-ecological framework to understanding intimate partner violence (IPV) as a multilayered phenomenon shaped by individual, relational, community, and sociocultural factors. At the individual level, early trauma, mental health, and personality traits influence IPV risk. Relational dynamics such as power, control, and post-separation abuse further shape patterns of violence. Community factors including neighborhood disadvantage, institutional failures, and limited service access create additional vulnerability. At the societal level, gender norms, patriarchy, and structural inequalities sustain IPV through cultural acceptance and legal inconsistencies. By integrating research across levels, we highlight the necessity of context to develop comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and culturally-informed prevention and intervention strategies that address the complex ecology of IPV.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102256"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145894017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-29DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102258
Wayne A. Warburton
The world is increasingly digital, and time on screens is growing globally. Whilst there are many benefits derived from the digital world, screen use may also come with some unintended consequences and costs. For example, it is now clear that many screen users engage at levels that are excessive, or have patterns of screen use that could be considered problematic or disordered. This problematic screen use (PSU) has already been linked to a range of negative outcomes, and evidence is now emerging for two effects with important social ramifications: the association of PSU with aggressive behaviour, and with decrements to executive functioning (EF). Recent meta-analyses find robust effects of problematic and disordered video gaming on a range of aggressive behaviours, and a growing number of empirical studies find relationships between aggressive behaviour and problematic video game, internet, social media and smartphone use. There is also an increasing body of brain imaging and cognitive function research finding clear evidence of both executive dysfunction related to excessive screen use and the likely neural substrates. Recent integrative work is synthesising these findings into a coherent narrative. Relevant to both of these effects is a substantial existing corpora of research linking executive dysfunction to aggressive behavior, new research that has quantified these effects meta-analytically, and a new model of aggressive behaviour in which EF is a central component. In this paper it will be argued that executive dysfunction may partially mediate the PSU-aggression link, but that substantial and targeted research is needed to determine these relationships.
{"title":"Aggression in a digital world: Problematic screen use, executive dysfunction and aggressive behaviors","authors":"Wayne A. Warburton","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102258","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102258","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The world is increasingly digital, and time on screens is growing globally. Whilst there are many benefits derived from the digital world, screen use may also come with some unintended consequences and costs. For example, it is now clear that many screen users engage at levels that are excessive, or have patterns of screen use that could be considered problematic or disordered. This problematic screen use (PSU) has already been linked to a range of negative outcomes, and evidence is now emerging for two effects with important social ramifications: the association of PSU with aggressive behaviour, and with decrements to executive functioning (EF). Recent meta-analyses find robust effects of problematic and disordered video gaming on a range of aggressive behaviours, and a growing number of empirical studies find relationships between aggressive behaviour and problematic video game, internet, social media and smartphone use. There is also an increasing body of brain imaging and cognitive function research finding clear evidence of both executive dysfunction related to excessive screen use and the likely neural substrates. Recent integrative work is synthesising these findings into a coherent narrative. Relevant to both of these effects is a substantial existing corpora of research linking executive dysfunction to aggressive behavior, new research that has quantified these effects meta-analytically, and a new model of aggressive behaviour in which EF is a central component. In this paper it will be argued that executive dysfunction may partially mediate the PSU-aggression link, but that substantial and targeted research is needed to determine these relationships.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102258"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145894041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-26DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102257
Ashlee Curtis , Wayne Warburton , Travis Harries
Cognitive dysfunction is related to aggressive behaviour across the lifespan; however, the role it plays in parent-directed aggression is unclear. This is of particular interest given the unique nature of parent-directed aggression, which occurs in the context of substantial parent-child interdependence, wherein the behaviour of each impacts the other. Acute and chronic cognitive dysfunction likely increase the likelihood of parent-directed aggression, and such dysfunction is related to four key domains: screen time, maltreatment, substance use, and neurodevelopmental conditions. Such dysfunction may also obstruct the effectiveness of intervention. Future applied and intervention research would benefit from focussing on the role of cognitive dysfunction in parent-directed aggression.
{"title":"Cognitive dysfunction and parent-directed aggression","authors":"Ashlee Curtis , Wayne Warburton , Travis Harries","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102257","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102257","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cognitive dysfunction is related to aggressive behaviour across the lifespan; however, the role it plays in parent-directed aggression is unclear. This is of particular interest given the unique nature of parent-directed aggression, which occurs in the context of substantial parent-child interdependence, wherein the behaviour of each impacts the other. Acute and chronic cognitive dysfunction likely increase the likelihood of parent-directed aggression, and such dysfunction is related to four key domains: screen time, maltreatment, substance use, and neurodevelopmental conditions. Such dysfunction may also obstruct the effectiveness of intervention. Future applied and intervention research would benefit from focussing on the role of cognitive dysfunction in parent-directed aggression.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102257"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145844925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-16DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102252
Nicolyn Charlot , Lorne Campbell, Samantha Joel
Warning signs of intimate partner violence (IPV) are a promising avenue for IPV prevention. Research on warning signs is emergent, and the current authors present recommendations to inspire and improve future research on the subject, with the ultimate goal of identifying signs that can be used in IPV prevention efforts. We propose that researchers (a) agree upon a common definition of warning signs, (b) identify signs that are strong, reliable predictors of IPV, (c) explore the complex interconnections between signs, and (d) prioritize at-risk populations for both research and interventions. Developing a deeper understanding of warning signs will give researchers greater insights into the early stages of IPV and provide intervention developers with a potentially powerful means of preventing violence.
{"title":"Warning signs of future intimate partner violence","authors":"Nicolyn Charlot , Lorne Campbell, Samantha Joel","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102252","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102252","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Warning signs of intimate partner violence (IPV) are a promising avenue for IPV prevention. Research on warning signs is emergent, and the current authors present recommendations to inspire and improve future research on the subject, with the ultimate goal of identifying signs that can be used in IPV prevention efforts. We propose that researchers (a) agree upon a common definition of warning signs, (b) identify signs that are strong, reliable predictors of IPV, (c) explore the complex interconnections between signs, and (d) prioritize at-risk populations for both research and interventions. Developing a deeper understanding of warning signs will give researchers greater insights into the early stages of IPV and provide intervention developers with a potentially powerful means of preventing violence.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102252"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145785865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-13DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102251
Emma M. Marshall , Allison K. Farrell
Enhancing social connection is a public health priority, but not all relationships are good for health. Partner maltreatment is associated with poorer mental health, risky health behavior, biological risk factors, and poorer physical health. Key underlying mechanisms may include threat hyperattunement and attentional biases, emotion (dys)regulation, self-esteem, and social positivity. Future research is encouraged to address methodological limitations by using research designs and analytical methods that strengthen causal inferences, alongside comprehensive and consistent measures of partner maltreatment that are distinct to traditional conceptualizations of low-relationship quality. An integrated relational, socio-cultural, and developmental framework would assist researchers in (a) identifying critical risk factors and (b) determining how partner maltreatment and the links with health unfold across the lifespan.
{"title":"Harmful social connection: Partner maltreatment & health","authors":"Emma M. Marshall , Allison K. Farrell","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102251","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102251","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Enhancing social connection is a public health priority, but not all relationships are good for health. Partner maltreatment is associated with poorer mental health, risky health behavior, biological risk factors, and poorer physical health. Key underlying mechanisms may include threat hyperattunement and attentional biases, emotion (dys)regulation, self-esteem, and social positivity. Future research is encouraged to address methodological limitations by using research designs and analytical methods that strengthen causal inferences, alongside comprehensive and consistent measures of partner maltreatment that are distinct to traditional conceptualizations of low-relationship quality. An integrated relational, socio-cultural, and developmental framework would assist researchers in (a) identifying critical risk factors and (b) determining how partner maltreatment and the links with health unfold across the lifespan.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102251"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145730920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-13DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102235
Monika Taddicken
This essay defines what counts as "good science communication" for fostering public trust in science. Because information about science reaches the public via intermediaries, design must translate complex knowledge while managing ambiguity and uncertainty. Communication research shows audience expectations shape evaluations of messages and of science itself. Accordingly, this essay begins with the audience-centred Quality Assessment Scale from the Audience's Perspective—fifteen dimensions (e.g., correctness, clarity, credibility, relevance, dialogue)—and then conceptualizes trust with the Public Trust in Science Scale as multilevel and multidimensional (expertise, integrity, benevolence, transparency, dialogue orientation). Mapping quality signals to trust outcomes yields testable recommendations for strategies that balance detail, uncertainty, relevance, and engagement without sacrificing rigor, offering a basis for designing, measuring, and iterating trust-building communication.
{"title":"Science communication and public trust in science through an audience-centered quality perspective","authors":"Monika Taddicken","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102235","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102235","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This essay defines what counts as \"good science communication\" for fostering public trust in science. Because information about science reaches the public via intermediaries, design must translate complex knowledge while managing ambiguity and uncertainty. Communication research shows audience expectations shape evaluations of messages and of science itself. Accordingly, this essay begins with the audience-centred Quality Assessment Scale from the Audience's Perspective—fifteen dimensions (e.g., correctness, clarity, credibility, relevance, dialogue)—and then conceptualizes trust with the Public Trust in Science Scale as multilevel and multidimensional (expertise, integrity, benevolence, transparency, dialogue orientation). Mapping quality signals to trust outcomes yields testable recommendations for strategies that balance detail, uncertainty, relevance, and engagement without sacrificing rigor, offering a basis for designing, measuring, and iterating trust-building communication.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102235"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145732724","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-13DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102249
Steven D. Brown , Paula Reavey
This paper examines historical shifts in how memory is managed within mental health services. Contemporary inpatient care, whether brief or long-term—remains focused on crisis containment and risk, offering little space for memory practices beyond the therapy room. As a result, memory often becomes privatized and detached from social contexts. We argue for collective and collaborative approaches to service users’ memories, which could support both patients and staff. Such practices foster awareness of how individuals interpret their past in relation to the present, strengthen connections with others, and enable generative forms of shared storytelling. We view this as central to recovery and social action, yet it remains largely absent from UK mental health services, despite being integral in other care sectors. Drawing on our work in secure psychiatric settings, we suggest ways collective memory practices might advance recovery and open new pathways between past, present, and future.
{"title":"Collective memory and mental health: Limitations, provocations, possibilities","authors":"Steven D. Brown , Paula Reavey","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102249","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102249","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper examines historical shifts in how memory is managed within mental health services. Contemporary inpatient care, whether brief or long-term—remains focused on crisis containment and risk, offering little space for memory practices beyond the therapy room. As a result, memory often becomes privatized and detached from social contexts. We argue for collective and collaborative approaches to service users’ memories, which could support both patients and staff. Such practices foster awareness of how individuals interpret their past in relation to the present, strengthen connections with others, and enable generative forms of shared storytelling. We view this as central to recovery and social action, yet it remains largely absent from UK mental health services, despite being integral in other care sectors. Drawing on our work in secure psychiatric settings, we suggest ways collective memory practices might advance recovery and open new pathways between past, present, and future.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102249"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-11DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102245
Ayelet Fishbach
Learning from failure is much like learning from unsolicited advice: a person may learn, only hardly enough. People learn less from failure than from success. Yet, they learn more from failure than from instruction alone, especially when they are confident in their ability to learn. These patterns hold whether failure carries more, the same amount of, or less objective information than success. To improve learning from failure, most interventions target the emotional barrier: the sting of failure. Far fewer address the cognitive barrier: learning from failure requires switching one's understanding of the world, which is more complex than simply repeating what worked in the past. Encouraging people to begin with a mistake (e.g., a “silly” answer) and post-failure, giving advice to another person, are some interventions that help overcome both the emotional and cognitive barriers to learning.
{"title":"Learning from failure is like learning from unsolicited advice","authors":"Ayelet Fishbach","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102245","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102245","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Learning from failure is much like learning from unsolicited advice: a person may learn, only hardly enough. People learn less from failure than from success. Yet, they learn more from failure than from instruction alone, especially when they are confident in their ability to learn. These patterns hold whether failure carries more, the same amount of, or less objective information than success. To improve learning from failure, most interventions target the emotional barrier: the sting of failure. Far fewer address the cognitive barrier: learning from failure requires switching one's understanding of the world, which is more complex than simply repeating what worked in the past. Encouraging people to begin with a mistake (e.g., a “silly” answer) and post-failure, giving advice to another person, are some interventions that help overcome both the emotional and cognitive barriers to learning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102245"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145731648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-11DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102246
Pamela D. Pilkington , Gery C. Karantzas
Cognitive factors are recognised as critical risk factors for violence within romantic relationships. In the current paper, we systematically reviewed and qualitatively synthesised findings from the 17 studies published in the last two years that have examined the association between cognitions and the perpetration and victimisation of intimate partner and sexual violence. We found that the literature on perpetration and victimisation diverged, with studies on perpetration being dominated by investigations into aggression-supportive and gender beliefs, whilst studies on victimisation tended to focus on beliefs relating to negative evaluations and beliefs about the self and others. Examining self-other beliefs in the context of perpetration could provide important insights into the cognitive factors underpinning violent behaviours against romantic partners.
{"title":"Cognitive factors associated with intimate partner and sexual violence perpetration and victimisation: A systematic review of current research ☆","authors":"Pamela D. Pilkington , Gery C. Karantzas","doi":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102246","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102246","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cognitive factors are recognised as critical risk factors for violence within romantic relationships. In the current paper, we systematically reviewed and qualitatively synthesised findings from the 17 studies published in the last two years that have examined the association between cognitions and the perpetration and victimisation of intimate partner and sexual violence. We found that the literature on perpetration and victimisation diverged, with studies on perpetration being dominated by investigations into aggression-supportive and gender beliefs, whilst studies on victimisation tended to focus on beliefs relating to negative evaluations and beliefs about the self and others. Examining self-other beliefs in the context of perpetration could provide important insights into the cognitive factors underpinning violent behaviours against romantic partners.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48279,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Psychology","volume":"68 ","pages":"Article 102246"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145732725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号