The Cycle of Violence in Context: Exploring the Moderating Roles of Neighborhood Disadvantage and Cultural Norms

Although the cycle of violence theory has received empirical support (Widom, 1989a, 1989b), in reality, not all victims of child physical abuse become involved in violence. Therefore, little is known regarding factors that may moderate the relationship between abuse and subsequent violence, particularly contextual circumstances. The current investigation used longitudinal data from 1,372 youth living in 79 neighborhoods who participated in the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN), and it employed a multivariate, multilevel Rasch model to explore the degree to which neighborhood disadvantage and cultural norms attenuate or strengthen the abuse–violence relationship. The results indicate that the effect of child physical abuse on violence was weaker in more disadvantaged communities. Neighborhood cultural norms regarding tolerance for youth delinquency and fighting among family and friends did not moderate the child abuse–violence relationship, but each had a direct effect on violence, such that residence in neighborhoods more tolerant of delinquency and fighting increased the propensity for violence. These results suggest that the cycle of violence may be contextualized by neighborhood structural and cultural conditions

The Effects of Neighborhood Context on Youth Violence and Delinquency: Does Gender Matter?

This study examined the effects of neighborhood structural and social characteristics on offending among girls and boys aged 8–17 residing in 80 Chicago neighborhoods. The results demonstrated gender differences in contextual effects, although not in ways predicted by social disorganization theory. Collective efficacy and concentrated disadvantage were not significantly associated with self-reported offending among males. Among females, collective efficacy was related to higher rates of general delinquency and violence, while disadvantage reduced the likelihood of self-reported violence. These outcomes suggest that neighborhoods may impact individual offending in complex ways and highlight the importance of considering gender when researching contextual effects on youth offending

Exposure to Intimate Partner Violence: Does the Gender of the Perpetrator Matter for Adolescent Mental Health Outcomes?

Youth who are exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) between their parents may be at increased risk for a multitude of behavioral and emotional problems, including mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and internalizing symptoms (Fergusson & Horwood, 1998; Finkelhor, Ormond, & Turner, 2009; Graham-Bermann, DeVoe, Mattis, Lynch, & Thomas, 2006; Zinzow et al., 2009). Research also suggests that males and females may react differently to being exposed to parental violence, although most of the findings in this area are mixed with regard to mental health outcomes. For instance, some evidence suggests that male witnesses are more likely to develop externalizing behaviors and females are more likely to suffer from internalizing disorders (Clements, Oxtoby, & Ogle, 2008; Kennedy, Bybee, Sullivan, & Greeson, 2010; Moylan et al., 2010; Yates, Dodds, Sroufe, & Egeland, 2003), whereas other studies have found that girls exposed to IPV are more likely than boys to demonstrate externalizing problems such as anger (Sigfusdottir, Farkas, & Silver, 2004). Yet others have found no gender differences in these outcomes (Fergusson & Horwood, 1998; Kitzmann, Gaylord, Holt, & Kenny, 2003; Sternberg, Baradaran, Abbott, Lamb, & Guterman, 2006)

Victimization Experiences and Adolescent Substance Use: Does the Type and Degree of Victimization Matter?

Evidence indicates an association between victimization and adolescent substance use, but the exact nature of this relationship remains unclear. Some research focuses solely on the consequences of experiencing indirect victimization (e.g., witnessing violence), others examine direct victimization (e.g., being personally victimized), and still others combine both forms of victimization without assessing the relative impact of each on substance use. Furthermore, many of these studies only assess these relationships in the short-term using cross-sectional data. This study uses data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) to explore the impact of experiencing only indirect victimization, only direct victimization, both forms of victimization, and no victimization on substance use at two time points during adolescence. We find that of those adolescents who are victimized, the majority experience indirect victimization only, followed by experiencing both forms of victimization, and experiencing direct victimization only. Each of the victimization experiences were associated with increased contemporaneous substance use, with the strongest effects for those experiencing multiple forms of violence. For all victims, however, the impact on substance use declined over time

Gender Differences in the Effects of Exposure to Violence on Adolescent Substance Use

To date, research exploring gender differences in the relationship between exposure to community violence and substance use has been limited. This study employs longitudinal data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) to assess the exposure to violence–substance use relationship and explore whether this relationship varies by gender. We find that the two forms of exposure to violence—direct (primary) and indirect (secondary)—independently increase the frequency of subsequent alcohol use, binge drinking, and marijuana use among males and females. One gender difference emerged, as females who had been directly victimized engaged in more frequent binge drinking than males who had been directly victimized. Across both sexes, the effect of each form of violence weakened when other predictors of substance use were included in the models. Future directions for this research are discussed, including policy recommendations to help adolescents cope with victimization experiences

Exposure to violence, substance use, and neighborhood context

Adolescent exposure to violence and substance use are both public health problems, but how neighborhood context contributes to these outcomes is unclear. This study uses prospective data from 1416 adolescents to examine the direct and interacting influences of victimization and neighborhood factors on adolescent substance use. Based on hierarchical Bernoulli regression models that controlled for prior substance use and multiple individual-level factors, exposure to violence significantly increased the likelihood of marijuana use but not alcohol use or binge drinking. There was little evidence that community norms regarding adolescent substance use influenced rates of substance use or moderated the impact of victimization. Community disadvantage did not directly impact substance use, but the relationship between victimization and marijuana use was stronger for those in neighborhoods with greater disadvantage. The results suggest that victimization is particularly likely to affect adolescents’ marijuana use, and that this relationship may be contingent upon neighborhood economic conditions

The effects of exposure to violence and victimization across life domains on adolescent substance us

This study uses longitudinal data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) to examine the effects of exposure to school violence, community violence, child abuse, and parental intimate partner violence (IPV) on youths’ subsequent alcohol and marijuana use. We also examine the cumulative effects of being exposed to violence across these domains. Longitudinal data were obtained from 1,655 adolescents and their primary caregivers participating in the PHDCN. The effects of adolescents’ exposure to various forms of violence across different life domains were examined relative to adolescents’ frequency of alcohol and marijuana use three years later. Multivariate statistical models were employed to control for a range of child, parent, and family risk factors. Exposure to violence in a one-year period increased the frequency of substance use three years later, though the specific relationships between victimization and use varied for alcohol and marijuana use. Community violence and child abuse, but not school violence or exposure to IPV, were predictive of future marijuana use. None of the independent measures of exposure to violence significantly predicted future alcohol use. Finally, the accumulation of exposure to violence across life domains was detrimental to both future alcohol and marijuana use. The findings support prior research indicating that exposure to multiple forms of violence, across multiple domains of life, negatively impacts adolescent outcomes, including substance use. The findings also suggest that the context in which exposure to violence occurs should be considered in future research, since the more domains in which youth are exposed to violence, the fewer “safe havens” they have available. Finally, a better understanding of the types of violence youth encounter and the contexts in which these experiences occur can help inform intervention efforts aimed at reducing victimization and its negative consequences