Psychol Trauma. 2025 Dec 8. doi: 10.1037/tra0002091. Online ahead of print.
OBJECTIVE: Recent research has increasingly focused on the relationship between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and prosociality, with debates due to inconsistent evidence. By comparing these studies, we assumed that different ways of classifying ACEs may affect the results of the analysis. Thus, we reviewed three theoretical frameworks for classifying ACEs and examined how these classifications impact the prediction on social mindfulness.
METHOD: In Study 1, 781 Chinese university students (349 males, 432 females; Mage = 20.03) completed an online survey about social mindfulness and ACEs. In Study 2, as previous research indicates potential inconsistencies between self-report and behavioral measures, to further verify the findings of Study 1, 170 Chinese university students (50 males, 120 females; Mage = 21.17) completed a Social Mindfulness test and an ACE questionnaire. During the analysis, ACEs were classified using three frameworks: threat/deprivation, interpersonal/environmental, and process/context. Multiple linear regression, relative weight analysis, and Vuong’s test were used to assess and compare the predictive performance of these models.
RESULTS: The interpersonal/environmental model showed the strongest and most stable prediction of social mindfulness.
CONCLUSIONS: The interpersonal/environmental model has unique advantages in explaining the impact of ACEs on social mindfulness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
PubMed:41359586 | DOI:10.1037/tra0002091