Does Exposure to Interparental Violence Moderate the Stability of Teen Dating Violence? a Latent Transition Analysis

Introduction: Although mounting evidence has demonstrated the high prevalence and severe consequences of teen dating violence (TDV), little is known about how these violent relationships develop and change over time. Thus, we extend previous research to explore: 1) whether there are distinct subgroups based on past-year victimization of TDV, 2a) whether adolescents change victimization classes over time, and 2b) whether adolescent change is less favorable for adolescents who witnessed interparental violence.

Method: Waves 2 and 3 of an ongoing 6-year longitudinal study were used because only lifetime TDV was asked at baseline. 1,042 adolescents from 7 public high schools in Texas participated in the study. Only participants who began dating at Wave 2 were included in the analysis (N= 842). The sample was 57% female with a mean age of 16.1. Approximately one third of participants self-identified their racial/ethnic background as Hispanic, White and African American. Wolfe et al.’s (2001) Conflict in adolescent dating relationships inventory was used to identify victimized classes. Latent Transition Analysis (LTA) with measurement invariance was used to examine transition probability of an individual’s latent status at Wave 3 given their latent status at Wave 2. Interparental violence was included in the LTA as a moderator.

Results: Three victimized classes of TDV were identified: 1) Non-Victimized (NV, 51.5% at W2, 49% at W3); 2) Emotionally Victimized (EV, 39% at w2, 40.7% at w3); and 3) Emotionally and Physically Victimized (EPV, 9.6% at w2, 10.3% at w3). LTA showed that the majority of adolescents stayed in the same class over time: Youth exposed to interparental violence were less likely to move to a less or nonviolent class compared to their unexposed counterparts. Specifically, 96% of the adolescents in the EPV class who were exposed to interparental violence remained in the EPV class at Wave 3, whereas 52% not exposed to interparental violence remained in the EPV class over time. Further, youth exposed to interparental violence were more likely to move from the NV to the EV class (37%) relative to youth who were not exposed to interparental violence (20%).

Conclusions: This is among the first studies to identify subgroups of victimization and to examine the stability of group membership over time. Consistent with Halpern et al. (2001), three victimized classes were identified. Youth exposed to interparental violence were more likely to remain in or move into violent relationships compared to unexposed youth. Implications will be discussed. In addition, our presentation will include an additional wave of data (currently being cleaned), which will provide an even clearer transition pattern.