Predictors of Latent Trajectory Classes of Physical Dating Violence Victimization
This study identified classes of developmental trajectories of physical dating violence victimization from grades 8 to 12 and examined theoretically-based risk factors that distinguished among trajectory classes. Data were from a multi-wave longitudinal study spanning 8th through 12th grade (n = 2,566; 51.9 % female). Growth mixture models were used to identify trajectory classes of physical dating violence victimization separately for girls and boys. Logistic and multinomial logistic regressions were used to identify situational and target vulnerability factors associated with the trajectory classes. For girls, three trajectory classes were identified: a low/non-involved class; a moderate class where victimization increased slightly until the 10th grade and then decreased through the 12th grade; and a high class where victimization started at a higher level in the 8th grade, increased substantially until the 10th grade, and then decreased until the 12th grade. For males, two classes were identified: a low/non-involved class, and a victimized class where victimization increased slightly until the 9th grade, decreased until the 11th grade, and then increased again through the 12th grade. In bivariate analyses, almost all of the situational and target vulnerability risk factors distinguished the victimization classes from the non-involved classes. However, when all risk factors and control variables were in the model, alcohol use (a situational vulnerability) was the only factor that distinguished membership in the moderate trajectory class from the non-involved class for girls; anxiety and being victimized by peers (target vulnerability factors) were the factors that distinguished the high from the non-involved classes for the girls; and victimization by peers was the only factor distinguishing the victimized from the non-involved class for boys. These findings contribute to our understanding of the heterogeneity in physical dating violence victimization during adolescence and the malleable risk factors associated with each trajectory class for boys and girls.
KeywordsAdolescent dating violence Physical victimization Trajectories Growth mixture model
This research was supported in part by the Intramural Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Child Development. The studies that provided the data for this research were funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA16669, S. T. Ennett, PI) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (R49CCV423114, V. A. Foshee, PI).
ABR, VF, and SE participated in the study design, interpretation of the data, and drafting of the manuscript. ABR conducted the statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
- Angold, A., Costello, E. J., Messer, S. C., & Pickles, A. (1995). Development of a short questionnaire for use in epidemiological studies of depression in children and adolescents. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 5, 237–249.Google Scholar
- Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equations perspective. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011). Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States [Rep. no. 61 (no. 4)]. Atlanta, GA: Office of Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services.Google Scholar
- Dahlberg, L. L., Toal, S. B., Swahn, M., & Behrens, C. B. (2005). Measuring violence-related attitudes, behaviors, and influences among youths: A compendium of assessment tools (2nd ed.). Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.Google Scholar
- Foshee, V. A., & Reyes, H. L. M. (2009). Primary prevention of dating abuse: When to begin, whom to target, and how to do it. In J. Lutzker & D. Whitaker (Eds.), Preventing partner violence: Research and evidence-based intervention strategies (pp. 141–168). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Foshee, V. A., & Reyes, H. L. M. (2012a). Adolescent dating abuse: Primary prevention efforts. In J. R. Levesque (Ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Foshee, V. A., & Reyes, H. L. M. (2012b). Dating abuse: Prevalence, consequences, and predictors. In J. R. Levesque (Ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence (pp. 602–615). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Fritz, P. A. T., & Slep, A. M. S. (2009). Stability of physical and psychological adolescent dating aggression across time and partners. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 38, 303–314.Google Scholar
- Halpern, C. T., Oslak, S. G., Young, M. L., Martin, S. L., & Kupper, L. L. (2001). Partner violence among adolescents in opposite-sex romantic relationships: Findings from the national longitudinal study of adolescent health. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 1679–1685.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hindelang, M. S., Gottfredson, M., & Garofalo, J. (1978). Victims of personal crime. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2011). Mplus users guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- O’Leary, K. D., & Slep, A. M. S. (2003). A dyadic longitudinal model of adolescent dating aggression. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 32, 314–327.Google Scholar
- SAS Institute (2010). Statistical analysis software (SAS) (Version 9.3) [Computer software]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
- Silverman, J. G., Raj, A., Mucci, L. A., & Hathaway, J. E. (2001). Dating violence against adolescent girls and associated substance use, unhealthy weight control, sexual risk behavior, pregnancy, and suicidality. Journal of the American Medical Association, 286, 572–579.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar