JB[v.

20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.1 (51-106)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

What characterizes them and how do they
contribute to meaning-making?
Svein Mossige
Norwegian Social Research (NOVA)

Tine K. Jensen,
Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies

Wenke Gulbrandsen
Nydalen Child Guidance Centre

Sissel Reichelt, and Odd Arne Tjersland

University of Oslo, Department of Psychology

Personal narratives from ten children who all claimed to have been sexually
abused were analyzed and compared to narratives of stressful events the
children produced in therapy sessions. The narratives were compared to each
other along the following dimensions: level of elaboration, narrative
structure, contextual embeddedness, and causal coherence. Each childs
attempt to find purpose and resolution was also analyzed. The stressful event
narratives were generally more elaborate, more structured, and more
contextually embedded and coherent than the sexual abuse narratives. Very
few of the sexual abuse narratives contained resolutions or causal
connections that are considered important for contributing to meaningmaking. It is suggested that in order to understand the difficulties children
face, a narrative perspective needs to include the emotional significance of
the events to be narrated, and a trauma perspective must include the cultural
impact of the event. A theory that intends to understand childrens narration
difficulties should encompass both these perspectives. (Narratives, Child
sexual abuse, Traumas)

Narrative Inquiry : (), .

- John Benjamins Publishing Company

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.2 (106-154)

Svein Mossige et al.

Introduction
Understanding childrens difficulties with narrating their sexual abuse experiences is important to multiple disciplines. The current understanding of childrens reporting of sexual abuse has mostly drawn on research related to childrens event memory and suggestibility. This research has been important in
determining that even quite young children can remember both routine, novel,
and traumatic events (Fivush, 1998), and also that under certain conditions
they may misreport events (Ceci & Bruck, 1993). This strain of research focuses
on what children can remember and report. Recently there has been an increased interest among scholars to understand more about the situations where
children do remember being sexually abused but choose not to talk or elaborate
on the event despite compelling evidence that such abuse has occurred (see,
for instance, Pipe, Lamb, Orbach, & Cederborg, in press). This line of research
concurs with much of the clinical literature describing childrens reluctance to
talk of sexual abuse, particularly if the offender is a family member. This clinical experience stands in contrast to the expectations often put on children, for
instance, in forensic situations in which they are expected to give a clear and
consistent account of their abuse experiences. Failure to do so makes the future
protection of these children often difficult. The need to understand more about
childrens difficulty with narrating abuse is therefore pertinent.
This paper contributes to the field by investigating the narratives from 10
children given in a therapeutic context. All these children had disclosed sexual abuse and were referred to therapy. A central aim of therapeutic work
with children is often to help children narrate their experiences and particularly, events that are difficult to share with others. This was also the aim of a
study conducted at the University of Oslo, Norway. Through this study we became interested in understanding more about the difficulties children seemed
to have with narrating their experiences and how they created meaning for
their experiences.
From a psychological and developmental viewpoint, it is considered important that children are able to narrate traumatic experiences. Through narrating, children learn about themselves and construct their autobiographic stories (Fivush, 1997; Nelson, 2003). When children tell stories, they learn to re-

Requests for further information should be directed to Svein Mossige, Norwegian Social
Research, P.O. 3223, 0208 Elisenberg, Oslo, Norway. E-mail: smo@nova.no

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.3 (154-204)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

member their specific past and to imagine their specific future. They gain a
sense of continuity and learn to order action sequences to make a whole understanding that can be shared with others. Narratives contribute to meaning
making (Nelson, 2000), and are considered important for their construction of
identity (Miller, 1994).
Even young children from the age of six seem to be competent storytellers.
When narrating about everyday events, children are concerned about telling
the listener the meaning of their experiences and are able to do so (Peterson &
McCabe, 1983). They make use of psychological causality to explain why something happened (McCabe & Peterson, 1985), and their story structure is most
commonly in accordance with a classic pattern where the story is organized
around a central point, followed by an evaluation and a resolution (Peterson
& McCabe, 1983). The representation of events in a narrative often includes
information on who, when, and where the events occurred, what the result
was, and on how the person and/or others who were there reacted (Trabasso &
Stein, 1997).
According to Jerome Bruner, it is particularly when deviations from the expected occur that we create stories (Bruner, 1990). When children narrate they
therefore must have a sense of what is normal and what is exceptional. Studies
have shown that even small children are able to make such appraisals about
what to expect about the nature, content, and unfolding of an event (Stein &
Liwag, 1997). This seems to be applicable to their knowledge and understanding of the interactive routines and interactions that take place between parents
and children (Stein & Liwag, 1997). They activate their knowledge about what
should have occurred in comparison to what did occur. One function of narratives is to highlight the unexpected and to make the experiences understandable in the light of culturally recognizable explanations or interpretations (Walton & Brewer, 2002). When children talk about experiences of novelty their
talk is generally narrative in form. The canonical ways of thinking within a culture are made available for the children through stories (Bruner, 1990), and
to construct stories is therefore an attempt to understand and reflect upon the
unexpected (Ricoeur, 1981).
This is neither an individual nor a pure social construction but rather a collaborate one. Narrativization is an act that takes place and develops in dialogues
(Gergen & Gergen, 1988). The unfolding of a narrative may be driven both by
the intention of the teller to create meaning out of something and also by a
wish in the listener to understand what is being told. In this sense a narrative is
an attempt both from the teller and the listener to co-create meaning.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.4 (204-242)

Svein Mossige et al.

When children are involved in events that violate cultural norms and that
are emotionally difficult, they may find themselves in an ambivalent position
when it comes to talking about their experiences. On the one hand, the breach
in the expected may promote narration. On the other hand, the event may
be difficult to understand and narrating it may be emotionally troublesome,
particularly when the accused offender is a person to whom the children and
mothers have emotional ties.
In this study we explore how children try to make meaning of experiences
such as sexual abuse. What characterizes childrens narratives of sexual abuse?
What characterizes childrens narratives of other stressful events? How can possible differences in narration contribute to our understanding of childrens
meaning-making?

The study
In this study, narratives from 10 children referred to therapy because of claims
of child sexual abuse from a close person to the family were analyzed. Six of
the children had disclosed sexual abuse to their mother and one to an uncle
before therapy. Three disclosed to their mothers while in therapy. In four of the
families the offender had admitted to sexual abuse. The children, eight girls and
two boys, were between 7 and 16 years old. All the children came from middle
class families and were part of a project conducted at the University in Oslo,
Norway.1 A total of 32 children from 23 families were involved in the project.
Since the purpose of this paper is to understand childrens narratives, only the
children who narrated or made efforts to narrate their abuse experiences in
therapy were included in this analysis.
The data consisted of therapeutic sessions, interviews with the children at
the end of therapy, and one-year follow-up interviews. The number of sessions
the children attended varied according to their therapeutic needs. The total

. The FOBIK-project: Suspicion of sexual abuse in families: Reactions and interventions.

Treatment and research team: Wenke Guldbrandsen, Tine K. Jensen, Svein Mossige, Sissel
Reichelt, Odd Arne Tjersland (project leader). The study was funded by The Norwegian
Research Council, the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs, the Department of Psychology at the University of Oslo, and Norwegian Social Research. The National Committee of
Ethical Medical Research approved the Study.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.5 (242-287)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

number of sessions analyzed for the whole group was 95, with a variation from
3 to 26 (mean= 9.5 sessions).
All the therapeutic sessions and the interviews were conducted by trained
therapists who met the children from a not knowing position (Anderson &
Goolishian, 1988). By appearing as an involved listener, by supporting the children in expressing themselves, and by confirming the childrens utterances, the
therapists offered a scaffold in an effort to make it safer for the child to move
into areas of difficult experiences. Both positions, to invite the child openly
into a dialogue and to offer the child this kind of scaffolding, were regarded as
important therapeutic efforts to involve the child in developing narratives.2
The children were invited to elaborate on their own experiences and were
initially asked open-ended questions such as: Tell me what happened, tell me
about that incident?, What did he do?, and How did that make you feel?
These open-ended questions most often did not lead to any narratives about
the abuse experience and further probing was needed. The data analyzed in
this study were thus not the childrens passive recapitulating of events that happened, but their response to an invitation from the therapist to speak about and
co-create meaning for the events.

Procedure
The therapeutic sessions and interviews were transcribed. Narratives were selected through the following procedure. First, the entire transcripts were read
and reread. Extraction took place of all the childrens narratives that fulfilled
the minimal requirements for what should be regarded as a narrative according to Kintschs definition (1977). The narratives selected thus had to contain
a sequence of episodes that consisted of an exposition, a complication, and a
resolution.
Second, from the sample of narratives, narratives that dealt with the following topics were sorted out: 1) narratives about the sexual abuse event (sexual abuse narratives) and 2) narratives about other stressful events (stressful
events narrative). This procedure revealed that four of the children had narrated the actual abuse experience to the extent that they fulfilled the definition
of a narrative. For the other six children, the narratives were about circum. For a more detailed description of the study and therapy process see Tjersland, Mossige,
Gulbrandsen, Jensen, & Reichelt, (in press).

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.6 (287-343)

Svein Mossige et al.

stances surrounding sexual abuse, such as what happened when they disclosed
the abuse or how they felt towards the offender (surrounding abuse narratives).
The third step involved singling out the most elaborate abuse or abuse related narrative for each child and the most elaborate narrative of another stressful event in the childrens lives. For the children who were able to narrate about
the sexual abuse event, this narrative was used even though they may have had
more elaborate narratives about surrounding events. For the children who were
not able to narrate the sexual abuse, the most elaborate narrative about the circumstances surrounding the sexual abuse was singled out. The criteria used for
defining what narratives were the most elaborate within each category was the
following six-part classification system ranging from least to most elaborate
narrative (Stein & Albro, 1996; Trabasso & Stein, 1997):
1) Descriptive Sequences Stories that contained descriptions of states and
objects with no temporal order.
2) Action Sequences Stories that contained descriptions of actions and endstates with a temporal but no causal order.
3) Reactive Sequences Story sequences where the events causally impact on
character and cause reactions and emotional responses but goals and goaldirected actions do not occur.
4) Incomplete Episode Stories in which the events are causally structured
into episodes (settings, initiating events, internal responses, attempts, consequences, reactions) but one or more of these categories are omitted.
5) Complete Episode Stories that are the same as in (4) but include all basic
episodic categories.
6) Embedded Episodes Stories that are the same as in (5) but the episodes
are now causally connected by goal plans or outcome failures (Trabasso &
Stein, 1997).
Using this classification system, the two most complex narratives for each child
were singled out, one pertaining to sexual abuse either a sexual abuse narrative or a surrounding abuse narrative and one involving another stressful event narrative. The result of this classification was 20 stories, two for
each child.

Analysis
The aim of the analysis was to describe and analyze the emergent characteristics of the narrative activity, that is, the narrative structure, the narrative con-

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.7 (343-394)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

tent, and the narrative performance (Bamberg & Reilly, 1996). The analysis
consisted of two processes. First, the two types of narratives were compared to
each other using the following narrative properties: 1) level of elaboration, 2)
narrative structure, 3) contextual embeddedness, and 4) coherence (Peterson
& Roberts, 2003).
Level of elaboration: Here Steins classification of level of elaboration was
used to assess elaborateness (Stein & Albro, 1996; Trabasso & Stein, 1997).
Narrative structure: The analysis of structure was based on a 1 to 4 level
rating of overall structure and organization. More highly structured narratives
are assumed to reflect more organized and more articulate representations of
ones own experiences (Buckner & Fivush, 1998; Peterson, 1994; Peterson &
McCabe, 1983). In Level 4 the narrative builds to a high point, evaluatively
dwells on it, and then resolves it. A Level 3 narrative builds to a high point,
then ends; there is no wrap up or resolution. At Level 2, the narrative describes successive events that are sequentially and logically ordered. In Level 1,
the narrative is too confused, disoriented, or contradictory for the listener to
understand.
Contextual embeddedness: This measures whether the narrative orients the
listener to what, who, where, and when the events took place (Buckner &
Fivush, 1998). It notes how much information the narratives contained about
details related to a) persons, b) location, c) time, and d) activity. To place a narrative about own abusive experiences in such a spatial-temporal context may
be demanding for the child because it implies that the child has to go into some
detail about what happened.
Causal coherence: Causal coherence is considered the most important type
of coherence (Habermas & Paha, 2001). Causal coherence answers the question of why something happened and includes both physical causality and human motivation. Causal coherence in a narrative is the result of efforts to make
connections between events. Such coherence plays a major role in the mental
presentations of narratives (Fletcher, Briggs, & Linzie, 1997). Sexual abusive experiences may be difficult for the children to understand, and narrating causal
relations between events may be an important part in these efforts. The narratives were analyzed to identify sequences that sought to explain why something
happened.
In the second part of the analysis we wished to understand more of the
childrens efforts to make sense of sexual abuse events. Each individual childs
attempt to find purpose and resolution to the sexual abuse was traced. As an
extension of the analysis of causal coherence, of why something happened, the

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.8 (394-442)

Svein Mossige et al.

sessions and interviews were analyzed with the following question in mind:
Is there a particular topic or question the child is most concerned about and
wants to understand?
The analysis was initially done by the first two authors independently.
Where there was disagreement, this was resolved by cross checking the transcripts and videotapes and then consensus was reached. The research team then
reviewed the findings in order to assure that the analysis and interpretations
was in accordance with the data.

Results
All the children were encouraged both in the course of the therapeutic sessions
and in the interviews to talk about what abusive events had happened. Only
four of the ten children were nevertheless able to say anything specific about
their sexual abuse experiences in what could be deemed a narrative according
to Kintschs definition. For three of these children, the offender had admitted
to sexual abuse. The other six children evaded the subject and spoke of surrounding themes related to the abuse. They told narratives about precipitating
events before the abuse, when and where it happened, how they were able to
disclose it, and what happened in the aftermath of the disclosure. Some children also talked about why it was difficult to disclose, and they talked about
being disappointed either in their mother or the abuser. All these narrative are
initiated by questions from the therapist.
The stressful events narratives covered a wide range of topics. Many of
the topics were about serious problems such as mothers use of drugs or alcohol, witnessing domestic violence, being hit by mother, being maltreated by a
teacher, almost being lured by a strange man, and being teased at school. These
events were clearly experienced as traumatic for several of the children. The
child initiated two of these stories; the rest came as answers to questions from
the therapist. Although there were wide-ranging differences between the narratives of sexual abuse and other stressful events, no typical patterns concerning
gender or age were found.

Level of elaboration
The stressful events narratives are generally more elaborate than the narratives
about sexual abuse, whether the narratives were about the sexual abuse event

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.9 (442-512)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

or surrounding abuse narratives, except in one case in which there is an equal

level of elaboration. When sexual abuse narratives and surrounding abuse narratives were combined into one group, the difference regarding level of elaboration between abuse narratives and stressful event narratives was significant
(Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test p < .01).3
Table 1. Level of elaboration from least to most elaborated (16)
Child

Bent Hanna Ine Cecilia Freddy Jane Eirin Ann Diana Gail
7-year 7-year 9- 10-year 8-year 810- 101316year
year year year year year

Sexual abuse
narrative
Surrounding
abuse narrative
Stressful event
narrative

(Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, p < .01)

For five of the children the narratives of the sexually abusive events lacked descriptions of goal or goal-directed actions while this was present in their stressful event narratives. The change from Level 3 elaboration to Level 4 marks an
important qualitative change from fragmented events (Level 3) to episodes that
are causally structured into episodes (Level 4). Causally structured episodes
turn the narratives into a meaningful entity. The episodic character of all narratives at level four implies that these narratives do contribute to the creation of
connections between the events, thereby giving the events a certain meaning.
All the childrens narratives of stressful events consist at least of one or more
incomplete episodes (Level 4 or higher). Only four of the childrens narratives
of the sexual abuse have this level of elaboration (see Table 1)
Ines narratives serve as a good illustration.
Therapist (T): Can you remember what he said?
Ine: That. . . that he wanted me . . . that he wanted me to. . . to touch. . . he
said pleeeeease.
T: He said pleeeese, and did you say anything?
Ine: I said NO.
. In all the statistics the abuse narratives and surrounding narratives were combined into
one group.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.10 (512-559)

Svein Mossige et al.

T: You said NO. How many times do you think he asked?

Ine: About six maybe.
T: What did you do?
Ine: I was drawing. . . He took out his penis and pulled it back and forth ..like
this. . . (pause).
T: What happened afterwards?
Ine: I cant remember.
T: How did it stop?
Ine: Maybe my mother came, or..I dont know.

Ines narrative has some degree of elaboration. It contains some descriptions

with some temporal but no causal order. Ine does not state what impact the
event has on her. The narrative does not contribute to create connections between events. It can be questioned whether the narrative serves any function of
meaning-making for her.
In her stressful event narrative she talks about a scary stranger.
Ine: Do you want me to tell you about that time I was at my friends house,
and right outside her yard there was this lady sitting there. And then this
man comes, with black pants. . . he had like a suit on, nice shoes and stuff,
and then he just came into the yard. And he asks us if we know where the
soccer field is. And the soccer field is right by the woods we call the kidnapper
woods, because thats where some kids have been chased.
T: Like by the woods?
Ine: Yes, and its a dark. . . dark and scary woods, you know. Lots of kids have
been followed by strange men there and stuff.
T: OK
Ine: Almost nobody dares go in there. The soccer field is right by there. Then
he asked us about the soccer field, and we thought it was odd that he was
going to the soccer field in a dress. And why did he ask us and not the lady
that was sitting there.
T: Hum
Ine: So we just pointed and said Its down that way. And he said I dont
understand. Can you show me? No Its right down there Cant you show
me? Cant you follow me down there? But luckily her mother came then
and he left.

Ine narrates a whole story with a start, middle and end. Her story is causally
structured into an episode with a setting, an initiating event, internal responses

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.11 (559-632)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

and reactions. She tries to explain why those involved reacted as they did. The
narrative does contribute to creating connections between the events.

Contextual embeddedness
Contextual embeddedness measures whether the narrative orients the listener
to what, who, where, and when the events took place, the spatial-temporal context of the narrative. Table 2 shows the number of the main spatial-temporal
dimensions (who, where, when, what) in each group of narratives. When sexual abuse and surrounding abuse narratives are combined into one group the
difference between this group and stressful event narratives was significant
(Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test p < .01).
Table 2. Number of main spatial-temporal categories (who, where, when, what) (14)
Child

Bent Hanna Ine Cecilia Freddy Jane Eirin Ann Diana Gail

Sexual abuse
narrative
Surrounding
abuse narrative
Stressful event
narrative

(Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, p < .01)

For all of the children the stressful events narratives are more contextually embedded than the sexual abuse related stories. The children take care in presenting the stories what, who, where, and when in much more detail than the sexual
abusive stories. The sexual abuse narratives vary according to how much detail
they narrate. Four of them contain some information about what the abusive
events were. Bent, for instance, gives a short but very precise description of
what happened when his cousin sexually abused him in the bathroom.
We were in the bathroom. I had shorts on. Then he put his penis into my butt. It
hurt. He told me that if I told anyone he would beat me up. . . Then I didnt dare
tell Aunt Ingrid, but I told mommy later.

Bent tells about a short course of actions; the abusive acts, the offender, and his
own immediate reaction to the threatening comments from the offender. We
are informed about who did what to whom and where.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.12 (632-687)

Svein Mossige et al.

Six of the childrens surrounding abuse narratives are about circumstances

around the abusive events but nothing specific is told about the abusive acts
themselves.
Gails narratives illustrate the differences concerning contextual embeddedness between sexual abuse narratives and the narratives of stressful events.
Gail was never able to tell her therapist precisely what happened when her father abused her. The closest she comes to a narrative about an abusive event is
when she tells her therapist about when she told her mother of some images
about her father.
I told her that I saw myself and dad. I saw that he. . . is standing in the bathroom
and that he. . . was supposed to wash me. I was small, do not remember how old. . .
he touches me and things like that .. I told her this.

The narrative contains some elaborating events. By telling a narrative about a

narrative Gail may create a distance to the events and help herself to elaborate
on the events.
The stressful event narrative is also about a traumatic event but she is
nevertheless able to narrate a more contextually embedded story. The story
is about her father being physically violent towards her mother:
I never saw anything, but I saw the bruises and heard her scream. He ruined
the telephone all the time so we couldnt call for help or anything. I remember
specially one evening when mom was at work. I came home and dad had been
drinking and was acting strange. He talked about all this stuff about my mother
that I shouldnt have heard about. And then my mom came home and we heard
that he beat up on her. I tried to make my sister and brother occupied with some
toys or watch TV. I tried to get help on the phone when he came and took it. Mom
told me to run to the neighbor who is a doctor. And then I ran down stairs and
he came after me and said that I couldnt go out. And then my sister came, and I
started pretending to play with her. And then he went upstairs again, and I ran
out and got a hold of the doctor. This was before he moved out the first time. This
was when my mother said he had to move.

In this narrative Gail tells about what happened, when it happened, who was
involved, and where it happened. Although the sexual abuse narrative contains
some of these elements there are very clear differences concerning details in
contextual embeddedness between the two.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.13 (687-758)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

Level of narrative structure

The analysis of structure was based on a 1 to 4 level rating (Peterson & McCabe, 1983). For every child, except one, the level of structure of the narratives
about sexual abuse (abuse narratives and surrounding abuse narratives) is at a
lower level than the corresponding level of structure of the stressful event narratives (see Table 3). The difference regarding level of structure between the
two groups of narratives was significant (Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test p < .01).
Table 3. Level of narrative structure (14)
Child

Bent Hanna Ine Cecilia Freddy Jane Eirin Ann Diana Gail

Sexual abuse
narrative
Surrounding
abuse narrative
Stressful event
narrative

(Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, p < .01)

In three of the cases the narratives about sexually abusive events is too confused
or disoriented to understand. There are no descriptions of successive events
or the descriptions are incomplete or very confusing. In five cases the narrative describes successive events that are sequentially ordered but with no causal
connection. There are no off the timeline comments in these narratives.
Anns narratives represent an example of a very clear difference with respect to narrative structure between the narrative about sexual abuse and the
narrative about a stressful event. Her stressful narrative builds up to a high
point, dwells, and has a resolution (Level 4). The events are sequentially and
logically ordered.
My mom had been shopping. And a friend of hers that lives on the first
floor. . . had some kittens. . . And she came up to visit and my mom wasnt
home, so she said she could come back later.
So when someone rang the doorbell later I thought it was her. . . I usually look
through the key hole to see whos there but, I didnt this time because I was
certain it was her.
And then I open the door and this . . . and this totally drunk was out there in
her bath robe and nothing underneath! She says she wants to talk to..I dont
remember the name, lets say it was Erik. She said I want to talk to Erik.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.14 (758-806)

Svein Mossige et al.

I said: hes not here. She said I know hes here! No hes not here! And
then she threw me against the wall and barged in. Mom didnt understand
anything so she just stood there. . . And she was looking under the pillows
and then she tried to go into the bathroom but my mom stopped her and she
scratched and hit my mother and stuff like that.
And she was a really fat lady. . . it was gross. . .
But then it turned out that she was looking for her husband! She was looking
for her husband under the pillows!!

The story is indicative of the narrative competency of this 10-year-old girl. She
knows intuitively how to build up a story and tell it in a way that engages the
listener. Her narrative competency seems to break down when she tries to tell
about her sexual abusive experiences. The story structure now turns out as confused and disoriented (Level 1). Ann is answering a question from the therapist
about what happened in one of the sexual abuse incidents. She never manages
to tell anything about the incident in spite of the support she receives from the
therapist. In her story there are some sequential events but they are not logically
ordered. Together the therapist and Ann have identified some occasions where
sexual abuse has taken place, but they have not yet explored what happened on
these occasions. The therapist invites Ann to explore what happened:
Ann: . . . but it happened on some other occasions too, for instance in the car
Therapist: What happened?
Ann: When we should. . . because we had a quarrel, me and mommy. . . because I wanted to have some candy for 2 $ and she gave me only 1 $ ..and then
we had a quarrel. . . and then I did not get any candies at all. . . and then I
managed to take a whole glass of. . . I do not remember what was in it. . . there
were some vitamins. . . and then I was allowed to go outside together with. . .
and then I was allowed to drive the car. . .

No doubt Ann is trying to explain something. She presents a setting or an occasion that is confusing. If we did not know the context the storys what, where
and when the story would be quite unintelligible for us. The story leaves the
listener in a state of confusion and the question as to what happened remains
unanswered. The therapist tries to overcome the confusion by putting herself
in a not knowing position in relation to what took place at that particular occasion. Ann makes an effort to answer. She also presents a kind of problem or
conflict but we do not know if the problem is solved and we do not know if
there are any connections between this problem and the abusive events that
took place. The problem is not about remembering the abusive incident. The

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.15 (806-877)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

problem is connected to the narrating. Not only does she have insurmountable
problems in telling about the abusive event, but also, her narrative competence
seems to break down when she attempts to tell about the circumstances, the
events that took place before the abuse. In the continuation of the sequence
above Ann is using the word it as if she takes for granted that the indexical
it has been understood by the therapist.
Ann: And it has happened many times
Therapist: What took place in the car has happened many times?
Ann: Yes

With the help from the therapist, Ann manages to tell a kind of story. The
scaffolding offered by the therapist through her willingness to understand and
make intelligible what Ann is trying to tell by using the same word it makes
it possible for Ann to proceed in the telling of some fragments of her story:
It has happened many times. The sequences above indicate that Ann has a
story to tell, but that her narrative competence, clearly demonstrated when she
told the stressful narrative, is not available for her when she is invited by the
therapist to tell her story about abuse.

Coherence as causal connections

The narratives were analyzed for both explicit and implicit formulations that
imply a causal connection between events in the childrens narratives. In two of
the four sexual abuse narratives we do not find any formulations explicit or
implicit about causal connections between events. Four of the six surrounding abuse narratives contain formulations about some kind of causal connections. In each of the 10 stressful event narratives, we found formulations that
imply explicit or implicit causal connections. (See Table 4).
Causal connections in narratives about sexual abuse have implications for
how the children understand their own or the abusers behavior. Only two of
Table 4. Distribution of stories with and without causal connections

Stories with causal

Connections
Stories without causal
connections

Sexual abuse
narrative

Surrounding abuse
narrative

Stressful event
narratives

2 (Bent, Hanna)

4 (Diana, Eirin,
Gail, Jane)
2 (Freddy, Ann)

10

2 (Cecilia, Ine)

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.16 (877-917)

Svein Mossige et al.

the sexual abuse narratives contained explanations about the possible cause of
the abusive act itself. In three of the six narratives the causal connections are
related to their fears about what they were afraid would happen when they
disclosed their secret. It is their own silence they try to explain: .. (if I told
someone) then he would beat me up; .. (if I told someone) then he would
go to jail; .. (if I told someone) then everybody would get sad. . . These causal
connections do function as an explanation for why the child was reluctant to
disclose, as in the case with Bent: Then I didnt dare tell Aunt Ingrid, but I told
mommy later.
In Gails narrative she expresses concern about whether her mother knew
anything about the abuse. A possible connection between some events makes
her assume that her mother had a suspicion about abuse: I think she had a
little suspicion because she saw that I went into the bathroom every time that dad
(the abuser) was alone in that room with my younger brother or sister. These
causal connections are important for how she experiences the relationship to
her mother. For a very long period she felt that it was unforgivable that her
mother had not stopped the abuse.
In all 10 narratives about stressful events we found utterances about causal
connections, and the use of causal terms like because is more frequent in
these stories than in the sexual abuse stories. I usually look through the key
hole to see whos there, but I didnt this time because I was certain it was her.,
He called me nigger and then I became angry, my mother started using drugs,
because her boyfriend did. The aim of the narrative is explicitly to explain the
reason why something happened and the causal connection most likely helps
the children in their process of making sense out of the situation.

What questions are the children struggling to make sense out of?
Several of the childrens narratives conveyed throughout the therapy were
about their struggle to make sense of the sexual abuse; in other words, to find
some resolution for it. Two of the children were struggling with issues related
to revenge, and three about how to go on with their life. Five of the children are
asking themselves Why? Three of these were wondering why they were sexually abused, one child was struggling with the question of why her mother did
not understand what was going on and intervene, and one could not understand why her disclosure had such severe consequences for her and her family.
The efforts to make sense of these questions were self-initiated and character-

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.17 (917-971)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

ized by an exploring attitude, much in contrast to their reluctance to involve in

narratives about abuse.
Hanna, for instance, is concerned about why her uncle abused her.
I do not understand why he did it .. (takes a deep breath) .. maybe he was
drunk ..but it did not look like he was... I dont know.. it was a little strange
that he did it.

The question remains unanswered. The answer that he was drunk and irresponsible does not appear to her as a convincing answer to why the
abuse happened.
Ine has also a main concern about why she was abused in her case, by her
older half-brother. Her relationship to her half-brother is ambivalent. There
have been both some good and some bad experiences in their relationship. She
arrives at two contradictory explanations. On the one hand she says that: .. it
was not his fault in a way because he had problems with himself. . . because his
stepfather was not kind to him. On the other hand . . . he knew he was doing
something wrong. . . Although he admitted to the abuse after she disclosed it,
he threatened her to silence while it was going on. So she thinks he is to blame.
She cannot tell the story about her half-brother having emotional problems
without telling the other story and vice versa. Like Hanna, Ine cannot find an
elucidating answer.
Gail struggled with the relationship to her mother. She is concerned about
why her mother did not discover that her father was abusing her and consequently stopped the abuse. Gail wanted her mother to suffer because she had
failed her, and at the same time, she wanted reconciliation. These contradictory
projects made her relationship to her mother difficult to handle. Through the
therapy and in conversation with her mother Gail came closer to accept that
her mother indeed was not aware of the sexual abuse and consequently that it
was difficult for her to protect her from abuse.
A recurrent question that concerned Bent was why his cousin sexually
abused him. One of his answers is that he himself may be gay. The question
of becoming or being gay is brought up by Bent in the therapy. Other than
the fact that he was abused by another male he does not really feel that he is
gay, so the question of why his cousin abused him remains unanswered.
Jane is very reluctant to say anything about the abuser and the abusive acts,
but she says that he should apologize for what he has done. The abuser has not
admitted to the sexual abuse, and for Jane an apology would represent some
sort of confirmation that he has committed abuse and also a possible resolu-

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.18 (971-1027)

Svein Mossige et al.

tion. Since the alleged offender does not admit to the abuse nor apologize, this
issue remains unanswered to Jane.
Resolution and meaning issues are also central to Cecilia: What I want is
that he says hes sorry and tells me why he did it. Her why-question remains
unanswered.
Fred and Eireen are also concerned with resolution, but their narratives
are more related to revenge and punishment. The relationship to the abuser
is a concern to Fred. He should be punished. Fred narrates a story about a
hypothetical event:
If he came here I would throw a flowerpot in his head . . . and I would
throw the whole house on him ... and then I would put it back in its place
afterwards.

In this hypothetical narrative, Fred turns the relationship to the abuser upside
down and situates himself as the one in power and control.
Eireen also tells a hypothetical fantasy story about her stepfather. In the
story he has become homeless. He is arrested and put in jail because of a bank
robbery. He is punished, but for something else than the abuse. The story has
no direct connections to Eireen. The abuser gets the punishment he deserves
while Eireen cannot be blamed.
The relationship to the abuser and its meaning is also a difficult and important issue to Ann. A possible solution to this issue is to get him at a distance. In
her story about gifts she has received from the abuser she deliberately discarded
everything he gave her accept one thing: ... there is one thing he gave me which
I kept, but that is a thing that was not made by him. It is a dollar. Her evaluation
of the events in the story is important for the meaning of it. It is the absence
of a personal connection to the abuser that matters, so she can keep the dollar.
Ann also initiates a drama with a possible solution to what position the abuser
should take in her life. In a drama in the sandbox the abuser is involved in several traffic accidents: And then he was hit by a car again and again and again. . .
and now he is dead . . . now I will dig a grave. The story, told both through her
metaphorical acts in the sandbox and her verbal comments to these acts, builds
to a high point and a metaphorical solution.
Diana struggles with the consequences of her disclosure. Her father was
arrested, and her mother lost the custody of all the children. Things happened
contrary to what she wanted and what she expected:

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.19 (1027-1072)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

I never believed that something like this would happen in my family. When
I was younger, before all this happened, it seemed to me ... from my point of
view, that my life was ok.

It is the consequences of the disclosure, the punishment of her family, that

bothers her and that is impossible for her to understand. The course of the
events, both when the abuse happened and after the disclosure, has been out
of her control and influence: I am fifteen years old and I feel I have not been
heard. Diana never found an acceptable answer as to why her disclosure led to
the consequences it did.
The questions that revolve in the childrens narratives are why-questions:
Why did he do it? Why did not mother discover the abuse? Why was the whole
family punished for the abuse? It is the bits and pieces of the narrative that
find no resolution. Some of the questions require a dialogue with the abuser in
order to be answered. The children are never in the position to get involved
in such dialogues. These children continue to struggle with their questions
throughout the therapy and they are not able to develop narratives that provide answers to their questions. Only in the three cases where the children get
involved in developing hypothetical or metaphorical narratives did they create a kind of resolution at an as-if level. The absence of an answer to the
why-question may explain some of their silence about the abusive events.

Discussion
Despite the fact that the therapeutic situation in many ways was optimally
suited so that the children could talk of their experiences in a non-threatening
environment, only four children narrated their specific sexual abuse experiences. Furthermore, both the sexual abuse narratives and the surrounding
abuse narratives were generally less elaborate, more disorganized, less contextually embedded, and less coherent than the stressful event narratives. The
most important difference between the sexual abuse narratives and the stressful
event narratives is connected to the meaning aspect. In the absence of explicit
causal connections in their abuse narratives, the children struggled to find answers to important why-questions. Their efforts most often do not result in
any resolution, whereas they do end up with some kind of resolution in their
stressful event narratives

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.20 (1072-1117)

Svein Mossige et al.

Although all of the childrens narratives were about things that bothered
and concerned them, there were significant differences between them. How
can these differences be understood? We will look into some of the complex
issues that may be involved.

The childrens narrative competence

In a study by Peterson and McCabe (1983) of a non-clinical sample, the narratives of 96 white children were analyzed concerning qualities like narrative
structure, contextual embeddedness, causality, and evaluation. Their conclusion was that children in general are not poor narrators, contrary to some earlier conclusions made by Labov (1972). All the children in our study showed
that they had well developed narrative competencies similar to the children in
the Peterson and McCabe study. During the course of therapy they often told
the therapist narratives about events that were important to them, such as the
last soccer game they played in, a school play they participated in or, a travel
experience. These narratives were often elaborate, coherent, highly structured
and contextually embedded in accordance with the classical pattern described
by Peterson and McCabe. Moreover, the children themselves often initiated
these narratives. They bear in this sense resemblance to what verlien and
Hydn (2003) call stories one likes to tell. These stories were often about accomplishments the child was proud of or enjoyed. Furthermore the childrens
stressful events narratives were also in accordance with a classical pattern. Consequently, the differences in narration cannot be explained by the childrens
lack of narration capacity.

Absence of mitigating circumstances

By their strong deviation from the expected and their violations of cultural
norms, the events of sexual abuse would impose upon the child a need to make
these events understandable through a narrative configuration (Nicolopoulou,
1996). When children do not narrate their experiences of sexual abuse, one
possible explanation is that they are not aware of the normative breach such
an act represents. This may indeed be the case for some very young children;
however, this is not a reasonable interpretation in this study. On the contrary,
through the childrens avoidance of the topic, the impression is made that it
is their awareness of the violation of cultural norms that prevents them from
narrating. Such awareness presupposes knowledge about these acts, in which

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.21 (1117-1163)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

context they belong, and in which context they do not. It is not reasonable
to assume that the children do lack the necessary and relevant knowledge to
interpret the abusive events they experience, which otherwise might explain
their trouble with the episodic structuring of these events within a narrative
(Trabasso & Stein, 1997).
While experiencing a father hitting mother may be as emotionally upsetting as being sexually abused, the cultural impact of the event may be different.
The cultural stigma, taboo, and privacy related to sexual abuse may make understanding and narration difficult. Their struggle to understand may be to
invoke what Bruner (1990) calls the mitigating circumstances. When Ann in
her stressful event narrative about the drunken lady tells that She was looking
for her husband .. it has .. the effect of framing the idiosyncratic in a lifelike fashion (Bruner, 1990, p. 67). In this way, by presuming circumstances
that are mitigating and turning to culturally recognizable interpretations, Ann
gets the story right. In relation to the abusive events, to invoke mitigating circumstances becomes a problem. When Ann tells her abuse narrative there is no
mitigating circumstances available to her.

Absence of a dialogue with the abuser

It is particularly in the relation to the abuser that the children try to invoke mitigating circumstances. But only one child, Diana, makes reference to a dialogue
with the abuser, where her father tells her that what he was doing was wrong
and that he was responsible for what took place. The episode did contribute
to how Diana understood what happened. She got a clear opinion about her
father as the responsible one. Still she had difficulties in understanding why he
did it. It is interesting to note that the structural analyses of her narratives about
the surrounding circumstances to the abuse indicate a very high level of narrative structure and elaborateness. Her dialogues with her father, the abuser, help
to clarify questions about responsibility and contextual embeddedness. These
are no doubts mitigating circumstances.
According to Bruner (1990), The function of the story is to find an intentional state that mitigates or at least makes comprehensible a deviation from
a canonical cultural pattern (pp. 4950). There is nothing in Dianas narrative about her dialogue with her father about mitigating circumstances in the
sense of intentions and goals. The reason why her father involved her in sexual
activities is still not available to Diana.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.22 (1163-1222)

Svein Mossige et al.

In the case of Ine, there is a partial admittance of responsibility from

her half-brother. Ine narrates a kind of dialogue with him when he asks her
to touch his penis and she says no. The dialogue is not of much help to
Ine in understanding why her brother abused her and what his goals and
intentions were.
The absence of exchanges of communication about feelings, intentions,
and goals connected to the abuse can explain the character of the sexual abuse
narratives as being reports of happenings more than narratives with an episodic
structure. When Cecilia states that It is not fun. . .when he sort of. . .just does
it . . . her complaint can be understood as a complaint about the absence of a
dialogue that at least could explain to her the abusers intentions, why he does
it, and an expectation that such a dialogue would contribute to an answer.
The children in this study do not come up with any idea about intentions
and goals that could otherwise mitigate the deviation from the canonical cultural pattern. The absence of such ideas can partly explain the childrens difficulties in narrating about their abusive experiences. The culture not only offers ideas that make a deviation within that culture comprehensible, it also set
some limits as to what can be mitigated through dominant narrative accounts,
prevailing attitudes, the law system, and moral standards.
Walton and Brewer (2002), in their study of how narratives function to
position children as moral agents within their culture, point to the importance
of what the protagonists know and think. The only thoughts we are told that
are delivered to the children are the abusers concern about secrecy. This limits the childrens possibilities for making moral evaluations and positioning
themselves in relation to what is good or bad in a dialogue with the person
who involved them in the sexual activity. When the abusive event is something
that just happens, the children are left alone with the project of constructing meaning and with the evaluation of their own moral stance relative to the
events. The odds of reaching an explanation of how the abuse started or why it
happened are very small.

Absence of dialogues with others

The development of childrens personal narratives is influenced through social interaction. Through discussing events with others, children become able
to organize events in more coherent, temporally extended and integrated ways
(Fivush, 1998; Nelson, 1993). Such narration also helps the child to interpret
events (Bruner, 1990; Fivush & Haden, 1997). According to the caregivers, the

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.23 (1222-1264)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

childrens experiences with being sexually abused had not been talked much
about, perhaps with the exception of Diana. The caregivers avoided the topic
for different reasons (Jensen, Gulbrandsen, Mossige, Reichelt, & Tjersland, in
press). In contrast, several of the stressful event narratives had been addressed.
Furthermore, many of these events were experienced with other people present
that the child most likely had talked to during and after the event, such as Ines
narrative about the scary stranger, Anns narrative about the drunken lady, or
Gails narrative about domestic violence. This previous narrativization contributed most likely to some of the variations between the childrens narratives
of the different events. So although the emotional impact may be great in both
the events, the children had previous narratives to lean on when they spoke to
the therapist.

The dialogue with the therapists

The narration of the childrens sexual abuse experience was a collaborative endeavor between the child and the therapist. It is not unreasonable to assume
that the cultural impact of child sexual abuse, the traumatic aspect of the event,
the lack of previous narrating about sexual abuse, and the emotional quality
of the event (representing something personal, shameful, and embarrassing to
talk about) also make this a delicate topic for the therapists. We therefore have
to consider how these aspects influence the therapists and the dialogical collaboration in order to understand the childrens difficulties in narrating about
their sexual abuse experience.

A trauma perspective
From a trauma perspective one would not necessarily expect children to narrate their experiences. According to trauma theory, events that remind the child
about the original traumatic events would activate aversive emotional reactions
associated with the trauma. In order to avoid these reactions the child may
evade narrating topics that activate these feelings (Koverola & Foy, 1993). In
some cases where the traumatic events repeats itself and the aversive reactions
are strong enough the avoidance may take the form of dissociation (Furniss,
1991; Terr, 1991). However, since the children in this study had made efforts to
narrate and in some way had disclosed the sexual abuse to their caregiver, this
does not favor an argument for dissociation as an explanation of the childrens
difficulties. The children did nonetheless show signs of emotional distress and

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.24 (1264-1303)

Svein Mossige et al.

avoidance that may partly explain why narration was difficult. This does, even
so, not fully explain the differences in narration between the stressful events
and the sexual abuse narratives. Clearly many of the stressful events narratives
could be characterized as traumatic for the children, and they were able to narrate these experiences. This indicates that differences in the type of emotion
traumas evoke may influence narration. What determines which type of emotion a trauma will evoke is definitely not the trauma per se. It is the meaning
that is attributed to it. Thus the trauma- perspective cannot by itself explain
the difference between the two types of narratives.

The question of false allegations

Regarding the six children where the offender did not confirm abuse, one could
argue that their narrations were limited because they were lying about being
sexually abused, or that their mothers had coerced them to make false allegations through repeated suggestion. The question of the validity of childrens
allegation of child sexual abuse is always an issue in cases such as these, and
the findings must be viewed in light of this. However, there were differences
between the narratives of abusive and stressful events for the children whose
offender admitted abuse. Furthermore, Diana was one of the children that did
not narrate the sexual abuse event despite that her father admitted to sexually
abusing her.

Conclusion
The ability to organize and understand our experiences is a fundamental part
of how we make sense of events (Fivush, 1998). This study has shown how the
children struggled to construct meaning-configuring narratives about sexual
abuse. The point is not that all sexually abused children need to narrate their
experiences in detail to a therapist. The study rather shows how difficult it is
for children to narrate their experiences despite encouragement to do so.
The way professionals interpret a childs lack of narration has important
implications for the child, the childs caregivers, and for the suspects. The study
is not designed to give an exact answer to why narrations are so difficult, but
some interpretations have been brought forward.
Childrens difficulties in narrating has been interpreted as a matter of doubt
if sexual abuse has happened (Ceci & Bruck, 1993) or that the experiences

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.25 (1303-1350)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

are not accessible to the childs memory and therefore cannot be spoken of
(Terr, 1991). While this may be the case for some children, this study points to
how the dialogical, cultural, and emotional aspects can contribute to narration
difficulties.
Several studies indicate that children are at least partly dependent on an
adults guidance in order to organize their experiences in narratives (see Fivush,
1998, for a review). Child sexual abuse is often, for different reasons, not spoken of either with the offender or other adults. According to Fivush (1998)),
children experiencing events in the absence of adult-provided narration tend
to have a less organized and less accurate representation of what happened.
Because of this it is likely that it will be more difficult for the children to integrate these events with other events in their lives. In the absence of discussing
sexual abuse events with others, the children may have particularly difficulty
understanding and coping with the event.
The stressful narratives were also about events with a traumatic content
for several of the children. The stronger refusal and difficulties to tell about
narratives about sexual abuse cannot solely be explained by a difference between traumatic and non-traumatic events. The trauma dimension may be of
importance to capture some of the reactions among children who experience
traumatic events, but it does not encompass the whole phenomena explored in
this study.
To be a witness to domestic violence or a mother who all of a sudden becomes a drug addict may be defined as traumatic events for a child. But the children who experienced these events still could bring them into narratives where
they are given a certain meaning. The same children did not manage to bring
their abusive experiences into a meaning-configuring narrative. Part of the difference may be explained with reference to the differences in topic or content of
the events themselves. The children in this study are sufficiently aware of what
kind of violation of canonical rules the abusive experiences represent.
When people talk about child sexual abuse they draw on culturally available notions about these phenomena. The struggle of sexually abused children
to make meaning of their history of abuse and to invoke mitigating circumstances is therefore culturally embedded. Within both trauma and narrative
perspectives, understanding the sociocultural context in which the narrating
of child sexual abuse takes place in is therefore imperative. In order to understand the difficulties children face, a narrative perspective needs to include the
emotional significance of the events to be narrated. The trauma perspective
encompasses the emotional aspects of an event but overlooks the specific cul-

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.26 (1350-1434)

Svein Mossige et al.

tural impact of the event and previous lack of narration. A theory that intends
to understand childrens narration difficulties should encompass both of these
perspectives.

References
Anderson, H., & Goolishian, H. (1988). Human systems as linguistic systems: Evolving ideas
about the implications for theory and practice. Family Process, 27(4), 371393.
Bamberg, M., & Reilly, J. (1996). Emotion, narrative and affect: How children discover the
relationship between what to say and how to say it. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, K. Amy,
& J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, Social context, and language. Essays in honor of Susan
Ervin-Tripp (pp. 329341). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Buckner, J. P., & Fivush, R. (1998). Gender and self in childrens autobiographical narratives.
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12(4), 407429.
Ceci, S. J., & Bruck, M. (1993). Suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and
synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 403439.
Fivush, R. (1997). Event memory in early childhood. In N. Cowan (Ed.), The development
of memory in childhood. Studies in developmental psychology (pp. 139161). Hove,
England: Psychology Press/Erlbaum (UK) Taylor & Francis.
Fivush, R. (1998). Childrens recollections of traumatic and nontraumatic events. Development and Psychopathology, 10(4), 699716.
Fivush, R., & Haden, C. A. (1997). Narrating and representing experience: Preschoolers
developing autobiographical accounts. In P. W. Van den Broek, P. Bauer, & T.
Bourg (Eds.), Developmental spans in event comprehension and representation. Bridging
fictional and actual events (pp. 169198). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fletcher, C. R., Briggs, A., & Linzie, B. (1997). The understanding of the causal structure of
narrative events. In P. W. Van den Broek, P. Bauer, & T. Bourg (Eds.), Developmental
spans in event comprehension and representation. Bridging fictional and actual events
(pp. 343360). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Furniss, T. (1991). The multi-professional handbook of child sexual abuse. New York:
Routledge.
Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1988). Narrative and the self as relationship. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 21 (pp. 1756). New York: New
York: Academic Press.
Habermas, T., & Paha, C. (2001). The development of coherence in adolescents life
narratives. Narrative Inquiry, 11(1), 3554.
Jensen, T. K., Gulbrandsen, W., Mossige, S., Reichelt, S., & Tjersland, O. A. (in press).
Reporting possible sexual abuse: A qualitative study on childrens perspectives and the
context for disclosure. Child Abuse & Neglect.
Kintsch, W. (1977). On comprehending stories. In M. A. Just & P. A. Carpenter (Eds.),
Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 3362). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.27 (1434-1526)

Childrens narratives of sexual abuse

Koverola, C., & Foy, D. (1993). Post traumatic stress disorder symptomatology in sexually
abused children: Implications for legal proceedings. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 2(4),
119128.
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the black English vernacular.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
McCabe, A., & Peterson, C. (1985). A naturalistic study of the production of causal
connectives by children. Journal of Child Language, 12(1), 145159.
Miller, P. J. (1994). Narrative practices: Their role in socialisation and self-construction. In
U. Neisser & R. Fivush (Eds.), The remembering self: Construction and accuracy in the
self-narrative (pp. 158179). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, K. (1993). The psychological and social origins of autobiographical memory.
Psychological Science, 4(1), 714.
Nelson, K. (2000). Narrative, time and the emergence of the encultured self. Culture and
Psychology, 6(2), 183196.
Nelson, K. (2003). Self and social functions: Individual autobiographical memory and
collective narrative. Memory, 11(2), 125136.
Nicolopoulou, A. (1996). Narrative development in social context. In D. I. Slobin & J.
Gerhardt (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language: Essays in honor of Susan
Ervin Tripp (pp. 369390). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
verlien, C., & Hydn, M. (2003). Work identity at stake: The power of sexual abuse stories
in the world of compulsory youth care. Narrative Inquiry, 13(1), 217242.
Peterson, C. (1994). Narrative skills and social class. Canadian Journal of Education, 19(3),
251269.
Peterson, C., & McCabe, A. (1983). Developmental psycholinguistics. Three ways of looking at
a Childs narrative. New York: Plenum Press.
Peterson, C., & Roberts, C. (2003). Like mother, like daughter: Similarities in narrative style.
Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 551562.
Pipe, M., Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., & Cederborg, A. C. (in press). Disclosing abuse: Delays,
denials, retractions and incomplete accounts.
Ricoeur, P. (1981). Hermeneutics and the human sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Stein, N. L., & Albro, E. R. (1996). Building complexity and coherence: Childrens use
of goal-structured knowledge in telling good stories. In M. Bamberg (Ed.), Narrative
development: Six approaches (pp. 544). Mahwah, NJ: Elrbaum.
Stein, N. L., & Liwag, M. D. (1997). Childrens understanding, evaluation, and memory for
emotional events. In P. W. Van den Broek, P. Bauer, & T. Bourg (Eds.), Developmental
spans in event comprehension and representation: Bridging fictional and actual events (pp.
199235). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Terr, L. C. (1991). Childhood traumas: An outline and overview. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 148(1), 1020.
Tjersland, O. A., Mossige, S., Gulbrandsen, W., Jensen, T., & Reichelt, S. (in press). Helping
families where ongoing child sexual abuse is suspected. Characteristic reactions and
how these changed during and after treatment. Child & Family Social Work.

JB[v.20020404] Prn:5/12/2005; 15:37

F: NI15208.tex / p.28 (1526-1535)

Svein Mossige et al.

Trabasso, T., & Stein, N. L. (1997). Narrating, representing, and remembering event
sequences. In P. W. Van den Broek, P. Bauer, & T. Bourg (Eds.), Developmental spans
in event comprehension and representation. Bridging fictional and actual events (pp.
237270). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Walton, M. D., & Brewer, C. L. (2002). The role of personal narrative in bringing children
into the moral discourse of their culture. Narrative Inquiry, 11(2), 307334.