ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Are psychologists aware of group psychological abuse? A survey on awareness of the phenomenon among Italian psychologists.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Psychologically abusive groups are characterized by systematic influence, relational control, and leadership structures that foster dependency; however, empirical data on how mental health professionals conceptualize these phenomena remain limited. The present study investigated Italian psychologists' knowledge, representations, and professional experiences regarding psychologically abusive groups. Methods: An online survey was administered to 232 psychologists across Italy between November 2024 and April 2025. The questionnaire explored self-assessed knowledge, information sources, representations of groups, members, and leaders, perceived abusive strategies, clinical experiences, diagnostic formulations, and training needs. Results: Limited formal preparation, with many participants relying primarily on non-academic sources despite rating scientific materials as more reliable. Abusive groups were predominantly described in terms of manipulation, isolation, and psychological control, while leaders were characterized by charisma, narcissistic grandiosity, and exploitative tendencies. In contrast, members were mainly portrayed as psychologically vulnerable, suggestible, and in need of belonging. Nearly half of respondents reported direct clinical contact with individuals involved in such groups. Reported clinical profiles were heterogeneous, with recurrent internalizing symptoms, trauma-related presentations, and dependency-related features. Discussion: Overall, findings reveal a partial alignment with contemporary systemic models of group psychological abuse, alongside a persistent tendency to frame involvement in individual vulnerability terms. The study underscores the need for clearer conceptual frameworks, evidence-informed terminology, validated assessment tools, and structured professional training to support clinical and forensic practice in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.