The Impact of Collective Efficacy on Risks for Adolescents’ Perpetration of Dating Violence
- 909 Downloads
Given prevalence rates and negative consequences that adolescents’ perpetration of dating violence may have on an individual’s well-being and future relationships, it is imperative to explore factors that may increase or reduce its occurrence. Thus, we aimed to identify how multiple contextual risk factors (individual, family, schools, and neighborhoods) were related to adolescents’ perpetration of dating violence over a 6 year period. Then, we assessed how neighborhood collective efficacy, an important predictor of urban youths’ well-being, buffered the relationship between each of the risk factors and adolescents’ perpetration of dating violence. Three waves of data from the Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study were used (N = 765; Ages 16–20 at Wave 3). The sample is 53 % female, 42 % African-American, and 53 % Hispanic. For the total sample, drug and alcohol use, low parental monitoring, academic difficulties, and involvement with antisocial peers were significant early risk factors for perpetration of dating violence in late adolescence. Risk factors also varied by adolescents’ race and sex. Finally, perceived neighborhood collective efficacy buffered the relationship between early academic difficulties and later perpetration of dating violence for Hispanic males. These results imply that multiple systems should be addressed in dating violence prevention programs.
KeywordsDating violence Adolescents Perpetration Neighborhood Longitudinal
We gratefully acknowledge the support of the following organizations. Government agencies: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (RO1 HD36093 “Welfare Reform and the Well-Being of Children”), Office of the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation, Administration on Developmental Disabilities, Administration for Children and Families, Social Security Administration, and National Institute of Mental Health. Foundations: The Boston Foundation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, The Lloyd A. Fry Foundation, The Hogg Foundation for Mental Health, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The Joyce Foundation, The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, The W.K. Kellogg Foundation, The Kronkosky Charitable Foundation, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, The Searle Fund for Policy Research, and The Woods Fund of Chicago. A special thank you is extended to our research firm, Research Triangle Institute (RTI), as well as to the children and caregivers who graciously participated in the Three-City Study and gave us access to their lives.
This article was one chapter of Melissa Schnurr’s dissertation completed at Iowa State University. She conceived the study, was responsible for the statistical analyses and drafted the manuscript for her dissertation. As an Associate Investigator of the Three-City Study, Brenda Lohman was critical in designing and assessing adolescent dating violence in the third wave of data collection. As Melissa Schnurr’s doctoral adviser, Lohman participated in the design, coordination, and writing of all phases of this study.
- Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry.Google Scholar
- Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
- Borus, M. E., Carpenter, S. W., Crowley, J. E., Daymont, T. N., et al. (1982). Pathways to the future, Volume II: A final report on the National Survey of Youth labor market experience in 1980. Columbus: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. Annuals of Child Development, 6, 187–249.Google Scholar
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (1993). The ecology of cognitive development: Research models and fugitive findings. In R. H. Wozniak & K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Development in context: Acting and thinking in specific environments. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G. J., Leventhal, T., & Aber, J. L. (1997). Lessons learned and future directions for research. In J. Brooks-Gunn, G. J. Duncan, & J. L. Aber (Eds.), Neighborhood poverty: Context and consequences for children (Vol. 1, pp. 279–297). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
- U. S. Census Bureau (1997). Glossary of decennial census terms and acronyms. Retrieved on May 18, 2011 from http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/glossary.html#C.
- Centers for Disease Control (2010). Understanding Teen Dating Violence Fact Sheet. Retrieved on May 18, 2011 from: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/TeenDatingViolence_2010-a.pdf.
- Chassin, L., Hussong, A., Barrera, M., Molina, B., Trim, R., & Ritter, J. (2004). Adolescent substance abuse. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (2nd ed., pp. 665–696). New Jersey: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Derogatis, L. R. (2000). Brief Symptom Inventory 18, administration, scoring, and procedures manual. Minneapolis: National Computer Systems.Google Scholar
- Gold, M. (1970). Delinquent behavior in an American city. Belmont: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
- Jordan, K. (2002). School violence among culturally diverse populations. In L. A. Rapp-Paglicci, A. R. Roberts, & J. S. Wodarski (Eds.), Handbook of violence (pp. 326–346). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1, 86–92.Google Scholar
- Nix, R. L., Pinderhughes, E. E., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., & McFadyen-Ketchum, S. A. (1999). The relation between mothers’ hostile attribution tendencies and children’s externalizing behavior problems: The mediating role of mothers’ harsh discipline practices. Child Development, 70(4), 896–909.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ohmer, M., & Beck, E. (2006). Citizen participation in neighborhood organizations in poor communities and its relationship to neighborhood and organizational collective efficacy. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 33(1), 179–202.Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, A., & Leisring, P. A. (2003). Beyond power and control: Towards an understanding of partner abusive men. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34(1), 7–22.Google Scholar
- Royston, P. (2004). Multiple imputation of missing values. The Stata Journal, 4, 227–241.Google Scholar
- Royston, P. (2005). Multiple imputation of missing values: Update. The Stata Journal, 2, 1–14.Google Scholar
- Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Steinberg, L., Mounts, N. S., Lamborn, S. D., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1, 19–36.Google Scholar
- Tolan, P. H., Gorman-Smith, D., & Henry, D. B. (2002). Linking family violence to delinquency across generations. Social Policy, Research, and Practice, 5(4), 273–284.Google Scholar
- Turner, C. F., Forsyth, B. H., O’Reilly, J. M., Cooley, P. C., Smith, T. K., Rogers, S. M., et al. (1998). Automated self-interviewing and the survey measurement of sensitive behaviors. In M. P. Couper, R. P. Baker, J. Bethlehem, C. Z. F. Clark, J. Martin, W. L. Nicholls II, & J. M. O’Reilly (Eds.), Computer assisted survey information collection (pp. 455–473). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner-city, the underclass and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
- Winston, P., Angel, R., Burton, L., Chase-Lansdale, P., Cherlin, A., Moffitt, R., & Wilson, W. (1999). Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study, Overview and Design Report. Available at http://web.jhu.edu/threecitystudy/images/overviewanddesign.pdf.