Search

This short-term longitudinal study examined whether the association between bullying perpetration and later physical dating violence perpetration and mediators of that association (via anger, depression, anxiety, and social status), varied depending on level of bullying victimization. Differences have been noted between those who bully but are not victims of bullying, and those who are both bullies and victims. These differences may influence dating violence risk and the explanations for why bullying leads to dating violence. Data were from dating adolescents in three rural counties who completed self-administered questionnaires in the fall semester of grades 8-10 and again in the spring semester. The sample (N = 2,414) was 44.08% male and 61.31% white. Bullying perpetration in the fall semester predicted physical dating violence perpetration in the spring semester when there was no bullying victimization, but not when there was any bullying victimization. Bullying perpetration was positively associated with anger at all levels of bullying victimization and with social status when there was no or low amounts of victimization; it was negatively associated with social status at high levels of victimization. Bullying victimization was positively associated with anger, depression, and anxiety at all levels of bullying perpetration. Anger mediated the association between bullying perpetration and dating violence, regardless of level of victimization; depression, anxiety, and social status did not mediate the association at any level of bullying victimization. The findings have implications for dating violence prevention efforts and for future research on the link between bullying and dating violence.

The peer context is a central focus in research on adolescent risk behaviors but few studies have investigated the role of the peer context in the perpetration of adolescent dating violence. This longitudinal study examined between-subjects and within-person contemporaneous and lagged effects of peer attributes, measured with social network analyses, on trajectories of dating violence perpetration and determined if effects varied by grade and/or sex of the adolescent. Data are from adolescents who participated in a five-wave panel study beginning when they were in 7 through 9th grade and ending when they were in 10 through 12th grade (n = 3,412); half were male, 40.5 % were white, 49.9 % were black and 10.4 % were of another race/ethnicity. Significant between-subjects effects indicate that adolescents who typically have friends who use dating violence, and girls who are typically high in social status, are at increased risk for using dating violence throughout adolescence. Adolescents who typically have high quality friendships and girls who typically have friends with pro-social beliefs are at decreased risk for using dating violence throughout adolescence. Significant within-person contemporaneous effects indicate that both boys and girls reported lower levels of dating violence than usual at times when they had more friends with pro-social beliefs, and reported higher levels of dating violence than usual at times when they had higher social status. None of the lagged effects were significant and none of the effects varied across grade. These findings suggest that the peer context plays an important role in the development of the perpetration of adolescent dating violence.

This study determined the shape of trajectories from ages 13 to 19 of 4 types of dating abuse perpetration and examined whether the demographic characteristics of sex, minority status, socioeconomic status, and family structure systematically explained variation in the trajectories. The data are from 5 waves of data collected from 973 adolescents participating in the control group of a randomized trial. The mean trajectory for psychological dating abuse was positive linear, but the mean trajectories were curvilinear for moderate physical, severe physical, and sexual dating abuse. At all ages, boys reported more severe physical and sexual dating abuse than girls, minorities reported more moderate and severe physical dating abuse than Whites, adolescents in single-parent households reported more psychological and severe physical dating abuse than those in 2-parent-households, and parental education was negatively associated with psychological and moderate physical dating abuse perpetration. The findings have implications for future research and for practice.

The authors test biosocial models that posit interactions between biological variables (testosterone, estradiol, pubertal status, and pubertal timing) and social context variables (family, peer, school, and neighborhood) in predicting adolescent involvement with cigarettes and alcohol in a sample of 409 adolescents in Grades 6 and 8. Models including the biological and contextual variables and their interactions explain significantly more variance in adolescent cigarette and alcohol involvement than do models including only the main effects of the biological and contextual variables. Post hoc analyses of significant interactions suggest that, in most cases, moderation occurred in the hypothesized direction. Consistent with dual hazards models of adolescent antisocial behaviors, the relationships between the biological and substance use variables become positive and stronger as the context becomes more harmful. Considerations of adolescent substance use should recognize the possible role of biological variables and how their influence may vary by social context. (Contains 3 tables.)

Objectives. This study determined 4-year postintervention effects of Safe Dates on dating violence, booster effects, and moderators of the program effects. Methods. We gathered baseline data in 10 schools that were randomly allocated to a treatment condition. We collected follow-up data 1 month after the program and then yearly thereafter for 4 years. Between the 2- and 3-year follow-ups, a randomly selected half of treatment adolescents received a booster. Results. Compared with controls, adolescents receiving Safe Dates reported significantly less physical, serious physical, and sexual dating violence perpetration and victimization 4 years after the program. The booster did not improve the effectiveness of Safe Dates. Conclusions. Safe Dates shows promise for preventing dating violence but the booster should not be used. (Am J Public Health. 2004;94:619-624)