Risk factors for adolescent dating violence
Prof. Erica Bowen, Coventry University
Inaugural VIA conference, October 24th 2014
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nature and prevalence of adolescent dating violence
Policy context
Issues of terminology
Rationale
Results
Implications and Conclusions
Nature and prevalence of adolescent dating
violence
Countries (studies)
UK (5),
Germany (1)
Sweden (1)
UK (4)
Switzerland (1)
Germany (1)
Netherlands (1)
Sweden (1)
UK (3)
Sweden (1)
Form of abuse
Girls
M %(range)
Boys
M% (Range)
Physical
20 (11-25)
23 (15-40)
Sexual
24 (6-50)
12 (2-40)
Psychological
48 (17-72)
44 (24-51)
Policy context
May 2011: Council of Europe Convention
Includes those younger than 18 years of age
Article 51 specifies that assessments of risk will be
conducted for perpetration and victimisation
September 20th 2012: England and Wales
Definition of domestic violence broadened to include:
non-physical coercive control,
AND individuals from age 16.
Issues of terminology
Risk factor = statistically associated with outcome
Kraemer et al (1997):
•Risk factor = precedes outcome
•Variable risk factor = precedes outcome & can be changed
•Fixed risk markers = precedes outcome & CANNOT be changed
•Causal risk factor = changeable, and changes lead to different likelihood of outcome
•Variable marker = precedes outcome & can be changed BUT change does not alter
outcome
Rationale
Vagi et al (2013) review of longitudinal perpetration risk factors; identified 53 separate
risk factors, BUT
Not limited to adolescence (10 – 18 years);
Focus solely on USA/Canada studies
Focus on perpetration
Published 2000 - 2010
PRESENT STUDY
Perpetration & victimisation
Adolescence only (10 – 18 years)
Any country (English)
Published 2000 – May 2014
Results
30 studies;
•13 perpetration,
•5 perpetration AND victimisation (ADV involvement),
•12 victimisation
56 risk factors for perpetration
39 risk factors for victimisation
Results: Perpetration
Cultural
Media influence
Structural
Ethnicity
Low parent education
Family structure
Relationships
Peer problems
Peer delinquency
Low social support
Inter-parental Violence
Parental hostility
Low caring
Previous ADV
Prior sexual intercourse
Individual
Substance Use
Mental Health
Emotional/Behaviou
ral regulation
Trauma
Attitudes
Results: Victimisation
Cultural
Media influence
Watching x-rated movies
Structural
?
Relationships
Peer problems
Low social support
Peer ADV
Sexual harassment
Inter-parental Violence
Parental hostility
Childhood maltreatment
Low caring
Previous ADV
Previous sexual ADV
Individual
Substance Use
Mental Health
Emotional/Behaviou
ral regulation
Trauma
Attitudes
Results: Summary & Limitations
No evidence for causal risk factors
Best evidence for variable risk factors:
Perpetration: pro-ADV attitudes; alcohol use, drug use, depression
Victimisation: alcohol use, depression
Studies typically quite basic & huge variations in:
•ADV definition
•ADV measurement
•Relationship definition
•Follow up
Implications and conclusions
Young people involved in ADV likely to experience range of other negative relationships
& present with range of issues
All services need to be aware and consider ADV
Early intervention required