Background/Objective: Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA) is the tool most extensively used worldwide for evaluating the veracity of a testimony. CBCA, initially designed for evaluating the testimonies of victims of child sexual abuse, has been empirically validated. Moreover, CBCA has been generalized to adult populations and other contexts though this generalization has not been endorsed by the scientific literature. Method: Thus, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the Undeutsch Hypothesis and the CBCA checklist of criteria in discerning in adults between memories of self-experienced real-life events and fabricated or fictitious memories. Results: Though the results corroborated the Undeutsch Hypothesis, and CBCA as a valid technique, the results were not generalizable, and the self-deprecation and pardoning the perpetrator criteria failed to discriminate between both memories. The technique can be complemented with additional reality criteria. The study of moderators revealed discriminating efficacy was significantly higher in filed studies on sexual offences and intimate partner violence. Conclusions: The findings are discussed in terms of their implications as well as the limitations and conditions for applying these results to forensic settings.

A meta-analysis of the state-of-the-art on the efficacy of batterer treatment programmes was conducted from the year 1975 to 2013. A total of 19 Spanish and English language research articles were retrieved yielding 49 effect sizes from a sample of 18,941 batterers. The results revealed that the recidivism rate as measured by couple reports (CR) was significantly higher than the rate based on official reports (OR), since the recidivism as measured by OR is underestimated. Overall, treatment showed a non significant positive weighted mean effect, δ = 0.41. Nevertheless, the counternull effect size, ES counternull =0.82, suggested a null effect was as probable as a treatment efficacy rate of 38%. The intervention type was not a significant moderator of recidivism, but the counternull effect sizes, ES counternull = 0.82 and 0.94, revealed an efficacy rate of 38% and 42% based on ORs, for Duluth Model and behavioral-cognitive treatment, respectively. The long-term treatment interventions had a significantly positive medium effect size, δ = 0.49. The implications of these findings for the design and assessment of future intervention programmes are discussed.

A B S T R A C TThe credibility of a testimony is a crucial component of judicial decision-making. Checklists of testimony credibility criteria are extensively used by forensic psychologists to assess the credibility of a testimony, and in many countries they are admitted as valid scientific evidence in a court of law. These checklists are based on the Undeutsch hypothesis asserting that statements derived from the memory of real-life experiences differ significantly in content and quality from fabricated or fictitious accounts. Notwithstanding, there is considerable controversy regarding the degree to which these checklists comply with the legal standards for scientific evidence to be admitted in a court of law (e.g., Daubert standards). In several countries, these checklists are not admitted as valid evidence in court, particularly in view of the inconsistent results reported in the scientific literature. Bearing in mind these issues, a meta-analysis was designed to test the Undeutsch hypothesis using the CBCA Checklist of criteria to discern between memories of self-experienced real-life events and fabricated or fictitious accounts. As the original hypothesis was formulated for populations of children, only quantitative studies with samples of children were considered for this study. In line with the Undeutsch hypothesis, the results showed a significant positive effect size that is generalizable to the total CBCA score, = 0.79. Moreover, a significant positive effect size was observed in each and all of the credibility criteria. In conclusion, the results corroborated the validity of the Undeutsch hypothesis and the CBCA criteria for discriminating between the memory of real self-experienced events and false or invented accounts. The results are discussed in terms of the implications for forensic practice. La hipótesis Undeutsch y el "Criteria Based Content Analysis": una revisión metaanalíticaR E S U M E N Con frecuencia, la evaluación de la fiabilidad de un testimonio se lleva a cabo mediante el uso de sistemas categoriales de análisis de contenido. Concretamente, el instrumento más utilizado para determinar la credibilidad del testimonio es el Criteria Based Content Analysis (CBCA), el cual se sustenta en la hipótesis Undeutsch, que establece que las memorias de un hecho auto-experimentado difieren en contenido y calidad de las memorias fabricadas o imaginadas. Las opiniones y resultados contradictorios encontrados en la literatura científica respecto al cumplimiento de los criterios judiciales (Daubert standards) así como el abundante número de trabajos existentes sobre la materia, nos llevó a diseñar un meta-análisis para someter a prueba la hipótesis Undeutsch, a través de la validez de los criterios de realidad del CBCA para discriminar entre la memoria de lo auto-experimentado y lo fabricado. Se tomaron aquellos estudios cuantitativos que incluían muestras de menores, esto es, con edades comprendidas entre los 2 y 18 años. En línea con la hipótesis Undeutsch, los resultados mostraron un tamaño del efec...

h t t p s : / / j o u r n a l s. c o p m a d r i d. o rg / e j p a l c Child-to-parent violence has received little attention in the scientific literature, but recently it has become the focus of scientific scrutiny owing to the sudden increase in the recorded rates of this type of violence (Condry & Miles, 2014). Thus, the prevalence of childto-parent violence (i.e., hitting either parent) in the USA for a 3-year period ranged from 6.5 to 10.8% (Peek, Fisher, & Kidwell, 1985); in Canada for a 6-month period the prevalence rate ranged from 12% to 60% for physical aggression and verbal aggression, respectively (Pagani et al., 2004(Pagani et al., , 2009; in Spain, where most field studies have been performed (Moulds & Day, 2017), the prevalence rate ranged from 21% for physical violence and psychological abuse to 46% for emotional abuse . In contrast, other studies in Canada and France found much lower prevalence rates of around 0.6% (DeKeseredy, 1993;Laurent & Derry, 1999). Moreover, prevalence is influenced by sociodemographic variables, economic status, child and parent gender, and family structure (Agnew & Huguley, 1989;Nowakowski-Sims & Rowe, 2015;Peek et al., 1985). The discrepancies in the results of prevalence rates are in all probability due to different definitions of child-to-parent violence, which in turn entail variations in measures and measurement instruments.

In order to assess the effects of child/adolescent sexual abuse (CSA/ASA) on the victim's probability of developing symptoms of depression and anxiety, to quantify injury in populational terms, to establish the probability of injury, and to determine the different effects of moderators on the severity of injury, a meta-analysis was performed. Given the abundant literature, only studies indexed in the scientific database of reference, the Web of Science, were selected. A total of 78 studies met the inclusion criteria: they measured CSA/ASA victimization or injury in terms of depression or anxiety symptoms, measured the effect size or included data for computing them, and provided a description of the sample. The results showed that CSA/ASA victims suffered significant injury, generally of a medium effect size and generalizable, victims had 70% more probabilities of suffering from injury, and clinical diagnosis was significantly a more adequate measure of injury than symptoms. The probability of chronic injury (dysthymia) was greater than developing more severe injury, i.e., major depressive disorder (MDD). In the category of anxiety disorders, injury was expressed with a higher probability in specific phobia. In terms of the victim's gender, females had significantly higher rates of developing a depressive disorder (DD) and/or an anxiety disorder (AD), quantified in a 42% and 24% over the baseline, for a DD and AD respectively. As for the type of abuse, the meta-analysis revealed that abuse involving penetration was linked to severe injury, whereas abuse with no contact was associated to less serious injury. The clinical, social, and legal implications of the results are discussed.