Recent studies have begun to explore how social ties relate to adolescent dating violence. Building upon prior literature that investigates the relationship between lifestyle patterns and dating violence, the current research explores how social ties developed early in life may indirectly affect intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization risk among adults by influencing risky behavior in late adolescence. Furthermore, the study explores the possibility that the relationship between social ties, risk behavior, and IPV may be gendered. To examine the direct and indirect effects, the current study uses data from three waves of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) to estimate multiple mediation models. Peer engagement and adolescent risky behavior have significant direct effects on IPV risk in young adulthood. Tests of indirect effects provide evidence of mediation with the social tie measures indirectly influencing IPV risk via their influence on risky behavior. Finally, there is evidence that the pathways to IPV victimization vary by sex. Implications for theory and policy, and directions for future research are discussed.
ArcherJ. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680.
2.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3.
BelknapJ. (2007). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage.
4.
BjarnasonT.SigurdardottirT. J.ThorlindssonT. (1999). Human agency, capable guardians, and structural constraints: A lifestyle approach to the study of violent victimization. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28, 105-119.
5.
BlackM. K.BasileC.BreidingM. J.SmithS. G.WaltersM. L.MerrickM. T.. . . StevensM. R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control.
6.
Carbone-LopezK.KruttschnittC. (2010). Risky relationships? Assortative mating and women’s experiences of intimate partner violence. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 358-384.
7.
CatalanoS. (2012). Intimate partner violence, 1993-2010. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
8.
CohenL. E.KluegelJ. R.LandK. C. (1981). Social inequality and predatory criminal victimization: An exposition and test of a formal theory. American Sociological Review, 46, 505-524.
9.
DaigleL. E. (2012). Victimology: A text/reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
DaigleL. E.CullenF. T.WrightJ. P. (2007). Gender differences in the predictors of juvenile delinquency: Assessing the generality-specificity debate. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 254-286.
11.
DesmaraisS. L.ReevesK. A.NichollsT. L.TelfordR. P.FiebertM. S. (2012). Prevalence of physical violence in intimate relationships: Part 1. Rates of male and female victimization. Partner Abuse, 3, 140-169.
12.
ElderG. H. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69, 1-12.
13.
FaustJ.RunyonM. K.KennyM. C. (1995). Family variables associated with the onset and impact of intrafamilial childhood sexual abuse. Clinical Psychology Review, 15, 443-456.
14.
FelsonM. (1986). Linking criminal choices, routine activities, informal control, and criminal outcomes. In CornishD. B.ClarkeR. V. (Eds.), The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending (pp. 119-128). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
15.
FosheeV. A.BenefieldT. S.EnnettS. T. (2004). Longitudinal predictors of serious physical and sexual dating violence victimization during adolescence. Preventive Medicine, 39, 1007-1016.
16.
GassJ. D.SteinD. J.WilliamsD. R.SeedatS. (2011). Gender differences in risk for intimate partner violence among South African adults. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2764-2789.
17.
GottfredsonM. R.HirschiT. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
GoverA. R. (2004). Risky lifestyles and dating violence: A theoretical test of violent victimization. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 171-180.
19.
HarrisK. M.HalpernC. T.WhitselE.HusseyJ.TaborJ.EntzelP.UdryJ. R. (2009). The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health: Research design. Retrieved from http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design
20.
HirschiT. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkley: University of California Press.
21.
HoxJ. J.BechgerT. M. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modeling. Family Science Review, 11, 354-373.
22.
HoyleR. H. (2011). Structural equation modeling for social and personality psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
JacksonS. M. (1999). Issues in dating violence research: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4, 233-247.
24.
JohnsonM. P. (2006). Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12, 1-16.
KruttschnittC.MacmillanR. (2006). The violent victimization of women: A life course perspective. In KruttschnittC.HeimerK. (Eds.), Gender and crime: Patterns in victimization and offending (pp. 139-170). New York: New York University Press.
27.
LaubJ. H.SampsonR. J. (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
LinderJ. R.CollinsW. A. (2005). Parent and peer predictors of physical aggression and conflict management in romantic relationships in early adulthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 252-262.
29.
LynchJ. P.CantorD. (1992). Ecological and behavioral influences on property victimization at home: Implications for opportunity theory. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 29, 335-362.
30.
MaasC. D.FlemingC. B.HerrenkohlT. I.CatalanoR. F. (2010). Childhood predictors of teen dating violence victimization. Violence and Victims, 25, 131-149.
31.
MagdolL.MoffittT. E.CaspiA.SilvaP. A. (1998). Developmental antecedents of partner abuse: A prospective-longitudinal study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 375-389.
32.
MasseyJ. L.KrohnM. D.BonatiL. M. (1989). Property crime and the routine activities of individuals. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 26, 378-400.
33.
McCarthyB.FelmleeD.HaganJ. (2004). Girl friends are better: Gender, friends, and crime among school and street youth. Criminology, 42, 805-836.
34.
MuthenL. K.MuthenB. O. (1998-2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
35.
ÖzbayÖ.ÖzcanY. Z. (2006). A test of Hirschi’s social bonding theory: Juvenile delinquency in the high schools of Ankara, Turkey. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 711-726.
36.
PapeH.PedersenW. (1999). Dangerous victims of violence?Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, 88-106.
37.
PedersonW. (2001). Adolescent victims of violence in a welfare state. The British Journal of Criminology, 41, 1-21.
38.
PoppA. M.PegueroA. A. (2011). Routine activities and victimization at school: The significance of gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2413-2436.
39.
RennisonC. M.RandM. R. (2003). Nonlethal intimate partner violence against women: A comparison of three age cohorts. Violence Against Women, 9, 1417-1428.
40.
RichardsT. N.BranchK. A. (2012). The relationship between social support and adolescent dating violence: A comparison across genders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 1540-1561.
41.
SampsonR. J.RaudenbushS. W.EarlsF. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918-924.
42.
SchadM. M.SzwedoD. E.AntonishakJ.HareA.AllenJ. P. (2008). The broader context of relational aggression in adolescent romantic relationships: Predictions from peer pressure and links to psychosocial functioning. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 346-358.
43.
SchreckC. J. (1999). Criminal victimization and low self-control: An extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 16, 633-654.
44.
SchreckC. J.FisherB. S. (2004). Specifying the influence of family and peers on violent victimization: Extending routine activities and lifestyle theories. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1-20.
45.
SchreckC. J.WrightR. A.MillerM. (2002). A study of individual and situational antecedents of violent victimization. Justice Quarterly, 19, 159-180.
46.
StrausM. A. (2008). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 252-275.
47.
TestaM.HoffmanJ. H.LivingstonJ. A. (2011). Intergenerational transmission of sexual victimization vulnerability as mediated via parenting. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35, 363-371.
48.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (2000). Prevalence and consequences of male-to-female and female-to-male intimate partner violence as measured by the national violence against women survey. Violence Against Women, 6, 142-167.
49.
VézinaJ.HébertM.PoulinF.LavoieF.VitaroF.TremblayR. E. (2010). Risky lifestyle as a mediator of the relationship between deviant peer affiliation and dating violence victimization among adolescent girls. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 814-824.
50.
WilcoxP.TillyerM. S.FisherB. S. (2009). Gender opportunity? School-based adolescent victimization. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 46, 245-269.
51.
WilkinsonD. L.HamerschlagS. J. (2005). Situational determinants in intimate partner violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 333-361.
