“…Moreover, except for 32 studies that had considerable samples (Barron & Topping, 2013; Barth & Derezotes, 1990; Beland, 1986; Berrick & Gilbert, 1991; Blumberg et al, 1991; Brown, 2017; Daro et al, 1986; Del Campo & López, 2006; Finkelhor, Asdigian, & Dziuba-Leaterman, 1995; Garbarino, 1987; Hazzard et al, 1990, 1991; Kolko et al, 1987; Kraizer et al, 1989; Liddell et al, 1988; MacIntyre & Carr, 1999; Nelson, 1985; Nemerofsky et al, 1994; Oldfield et al, 1996; Ostbloom et al, 1987; Pohl & Hazzard, 1990; Pulido et al, 2015; Ray & Dietzel, 1984; Sigurdson et al, 1987; Spungen, Jensen, Finkelstein, & Satinsky, 1989; Taal & Edelaar, 1997; Tremblay, 1998; Tutty, 1992; Tutty, 1997; Wolfe et al, 1986; Woods & Dean, 1986, Wurtele & Owens, 1997), the size of the samples used is generally very small. For example, Harbeck et al (1992) relied on a sample of 20 participants with a wide range of ages, from 4 to 16 years, which hardly allows to generalize to groups with such disparate ages. The samples are especially reduced when studies are conducted with preschool children.…”