Abstract: School Risk Factors for Early Adolescent Dating Aggression (Society for Prevention Research 23rd Annual Meeting)

379 School Risk Factors for Early Adolescent Dating Aggression

Schedule:
Thursday, May 28, 2015
Columbia A/B (Hyatt Regency Washington)
* noted as presenting author
Terri Sullivan, PhD, Associate Professor, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
Katherine Taylor, PhD, Postdoctoral Fellow, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
Elizabeth Goncy, PhD, Research Assistant Professor, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
Rachel C. Garthe, MS, Doctoral Student, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
Introduction: The identification of risk and protective factors for dating aggression is needed based on its high prevalence and negative outcomes. School factors (e.g., the quality of school climate) can enrich or hinder adolescents’ psychological well-being and safety (Eccles, 2004). Little research addresses the influence of school environment variables on adolescent dating aggression, and this is the focus of the current study.

Methods: Participants included youth in a dating relationship in the fall (Wave 1) and spring (Wave 2) of 7th grade (N = 1,079; 53% male; 53% African American, 19% Latino/a, 17% White, and 11% other). Psychological and physical dating aggression was assessed using the Dating Violence Scale (Foshee et al., 1996), and school environment variables were assessed using the School Safety Problems scale (U.S. Department of Education, 1999) and Student Classroom Climate Scale (Vessels, 1998). Multilevel analyses were run using Mplus. Separate models were run for each dating aggression subtype; student- and class-level (same school, grade, and cohort; n = 37) variables were represented at Level 1 and 2. Level 1 covariates (family structure, gender, race/ethnicity, and Wave 1 dating aggression) were entered first; Level 1 predictors (Wave 1 school environment variables) were entered next, followed by Level 2 covariates (intervention condition, concentrated disadvantage, and Wave 1 dating aggression) and predictors (Wave 1 school environment variables).

Results: At Level 1, awareness/reporting predicted changes in physical (β = -.20, = .022) and psychological (β = -.23, = .006) aggression over time, such that higher levels of awareness/reporting were related to smaller changes in both subtypes of dating aggression from Wave 1 to Wave 2. Student-student relationships were also related to psychological dating aggression (β = -.06, = .029); such that, more positive relationships were associated with smaller changes in psychological dating aggression. At Level 2, school environment variables did not predict changes in class averages of physical or psychological dating aggression over time.

Conclusions: These findings are important in addressing the role of individual and class-level school environment variables in influencing rates of dating aggression in middle school contexts, and can inform dating violence prevention programs.