Concentrated Disadvantage and Intimate Partner Violence

Research documents numerous individual-level risk factors for adolescent dating violence victimization, as well as an association between area concentrated disadvantage (i.e., areas characterized by high poverty, unemployment, and residential turnover) and partner violence among adults. However, little is known about contextual contributors to adolescent dating violence (DV). Although concentrated disadvantage has been linked to the most severe form of intimate partner violence - partner homicide (IPH) - most such studies have been conducted in urban areas, and have examined only female-victim IPH. In this dissertation, I approach partner violence from an ecological perspective and apply social science theories to predict relationships between contextual disadvantage and partner violence outcomes. In my first paper, I assess the relationship between school disadvantage and adolescent dating violence victimization using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (n=10,620). In multilevel random effects models controlling for individual and school sociodemographic characteristics, school disadvantage is found to moderate the association between family disadvantage and girls' victimization. However, school disadvantage was unrelated to boys' victimization. In the second paper I explore the ecological relationship between disadvantage and intimate partner homicide rates in North Carolina counties (n=100) using data from the North Carolina Violent Death Reporting System, the 2000 Census, and the North Carolina Council for Women's annual survey of NC domestic violence programs. Using Poisson regression models with population offset terms and controlling for percent of the population age 20-40 years, female-to-male sex ratio, and sex ratio squared, I found county disadvantage was positively related to male-victim IPH but not significantly associated with female-victim IPH; neither relationship varied by county rurality. Further, domestic violence service availability and funding variables were not supported as mediators between county disadvantage and male-victim IPH. Results suggest that contextual disadvantage may have direct or moderating effects on partner violence outcomes, depending on the gender of the victim, age of study participants, severity of outcome studied, and level of data utilized. Future studies should examine the relationship between contextual disadvantage and other partner violence outcomes (e.g., severe victimization and various levels of perpetration) as well as mechanisms by which contextual disadvantage affects such outcomes

Timing of Sexual Debut and Initiation of Postsecondary Education by Early Adulthood

CONTEXT: Although sexual debut has been negatively associated with adolescent educational performance and aspirations, it is not clear whether such relationships continue beyond adolescence. METHODS: Initiation of postsecondary education by young adulthood was assessed among 3,965 participants in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health who had not experienced sexual intercourse at baseline. Associations between age at sexual debut and educational progress were examined in bivariate and multivariable Poisson regression analyses. RESULTS: Most respondents experienced sexual debut during adolescence: 15% before age 16 (early) and 53% at ages 16-18 (typical). Sixty-five percent of respondents initiated postsecondary education by early adulthood; however, the proportion was significantly lower among those who had had an early (49%) or typical sexual debut (63%) than among those who debuted late (78%). In unadjusted analyses, early and typical debut were associated with a reduced likelihood of initiation of postsecondary education for both females (relative risk ratios, 0.6 and 0.8, respectively) and males (0.7 and 0.8). However, in adjusted analyses, the associations were attenuated for females (0.8 and 0.9) and were at best marginally significant for males. Childbearing was a significant mediator of this relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent sexual debut appears to be modestly negatively associated with early adult postsecondary education initiation, particularly for females. Targeting mediators of the sexual debut-education relationship, such as early childbearing, could lead to effective interventions

Sexual Debut Timing and Depressive Symptoms in Emerging Adulthood

The association between sexual debut timing and depressive symptomatology in adolescence and emerging adulthood was examined using data from Waves I, II and III of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Respondents who reported never having sexual intercourse at Wave I and were 18–22 years of age at Wave III were included (n=5,061). Twenty percent of respondents experienced early (<age 16) and 49% experienced typical (ages 16–18) sexual debut. In bivariate analyses, pre-debut depressive symptoms were associated with earlier sexual debut among female but not male adolescents. In models adjusting for demographic characteristics and pre-debut depressive symptoms, sexual debut was positively related to adolescent (Wave II) depressive symptomatology, but only among female adolescents age less than sixteen. However, sexual debut timing was unassociated with emerging adult (Wave III) depressive symptomatology for both male and female respondents. Findings suggest sexual debut timing does not have implications for depressive symptomatology beyond adolescence

Patterns of Intimate Partner Violence Victimization from Adolescence to Young Adulthood in a Nationally Representative Sample

To determine the prevalence of patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization from adolescence to young adulthood, and document associations with selected sociodemographic and experiential factors

Adolescent Bullying Involvement and Perceived Family, Peer and School Relations: Commonalities and Differences Across Race/Ethnicity

Although bullying is recognized as a serious problem in the U.S., little is known about racial/ethnic differences in bullying risk. This study examined associations between bullying and family, peer, and school relations for White, Black and Hispanic adolescents

Area Disadvantage and Intimate Partner Homicide: An Ecological Analysis of North Carolina Counties, 2004–2006

Using data from the North Carolina Violent Death Reporting System and other sources, we examined ecologic relationships between county (n=100) disadvantage and intimate partner homicide (IPH), variability by victim gender and county urbanicity, and potential mediators. County disadvantage was related to female-victim homicide only in metropolitan counties (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.25); however, disadvantage was associated with male-victim IPH regardless of county urbanicity (IRR 1.17). None of the potential intervening variables examined (shelter availability, intimate partner violence services’ funding), was supported as a mediator. Results suggest disparities across North Carolina counties in IPH according to county disadvantage. Future research should explore other potential mediators (i.e., service accessibility and law enforcement responses), as well as test the robustness of findings using additional years of data

Family and school socioeconomic disadvantage: Interactive influences on adolescent dating violence victimization

Although low socioeconomic status has been positively associated with adult partner violence, its relationship to adolescent dating violence remains unclear. Further, few studies have examined the relationship between contextual disadvantage and adolescent dating violence, or the interactive influences of family and contextual disadvantage. Guided by Social Disorganization Theory, Relative Deprivation Theory, and Gendered Resource Theory, we analyzed data from the U.S. National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (1994-1996) to explore how family and school disadvantage relate to dating violence victimization. Psychological and minor physical victimization were self-reported by adolescents in up to six heterosexual romantic or sexual relationships. Family and school disadvantage were based on a principal component analysis of soecioeconomic indicators reported by adolescents and parents. In weighted multilevel random effects models, between-school variability in dating violence victimization was proportionately small but substantive: 10% for male victimization and 5% for female victimization. In bivariate analyses, family disadvantage was positively related to victimization for both males and females; however, school disadvantage was only related to males’ physical victimization. In models adjusted for race/ethnicity, relative age within the school, and mean school age, neither family nor school disadvantage remained related to males’ victimization. For females, family disadvantage remained significantly positively associated with victimization, but was modified by school disadvantage: family disadvantage was more strongly associated with dating violence victimization in more advantaged schools. Findings support gendered resource theory, and suggest that status differentials between females and their school context may increase their vulnerability to dating violence victimization

Patterns of Intimate Partner Violence Victimization from Adolescence to Young Adulthood in a Nationally Representative Sample

PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization from adolescence to young adulthood, and document associations with selected sociodemographic and experiential factors. METHODS: We used prospective data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to group 4,134 respondents reporting only opposite-sex romantic or sexual relationships in adolescence and young adulthood into four victimization patterns: no IPV victimization, adolescent-limited IPV victimization, young adult onset IPV victimization, and adolescent-young adult persistent IPV victimization. RESULTS: Forty percent of respondents reported physical or sexual victimization by young adulthood. Eight percent experienced IPV only in adolescence, 25% only in young adulthood, and 7% showed persistent victimization. Female sex, Hispanic and non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity, an atypical family structure (something other than two biologic parents, step family, single parent), more romantic partners, experiencing childhood abuse, and early sexual debut (before age 16) were each associated with one or more patterns of victimization versus none. Number of romantic partners and early sexual debut were the most consistent predictors of violence, its timing of onset, and whether victimization persisted across developmental periods. These associations did not vary by biological sex. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial numbers of young adults have experienced physical or sexual IPV victimization. More research is needed to understand the developmental and experiential mechanisms underlying timing of onset of victimization, whether victimization persists across time and relationships, and whether etiology and temporal patterns vary by type of violence. These additional distinctions would inform the timing, content, and targeting of violence prevention efforts