Development and Validation of the Teen Dating Aggression Measure Among Canadian Youth

Teen dating violence (TDV) victimization is a traumatic experience that can have adverse consequences for adolescents. Current measures that assess TDV do not fully distinguish between psychological and relational forms of aggression, nor do they capture aggressive acts that are common within adolescent relationships. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Teen Dating Aggression Measure (TeDAM) using a sample of 730 Canadian adolescents (M = 15.88 years, SD = 1.23). The measure is an expansion of the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory and includes items that describe other forms of violence such as coercion and control, along with more traditional indicators of dating violence (e.g., sexual aggression). Factor analyses yielded three factors, namely psychological aggression, sexual and physical aggression, and relational aggression, which were correlated with more frequent cannabis and alcohol use as well as rape myth acceptance. These results provide initial support for the utility of the TeDAM for assessing TDV with adolescents.

Longitudinal Risk Profiles for Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Dating Aggression: a Latent Profile Analysis with Spanish Adolescents

Introduction Understanding the specific risk profile for distinct forms of dating aggression (DA) is very informative to define cross-cutting interventions. The study aims to evaluate whether specific profiles of risk defined using a person-oriented approach predicted physical, sexual, and psychological DA after 6 months. Methods Eight hundred sixty-six Spanish adolescents were interviewed at two time points (50.5% male; average age = 15.04). Latent profile analysis at T1 was used to delineate profiles of individual and relational risk. Results A three-class model best represents the data: a “normative” class (N = 768; 88%); a “highly aggressive” class characterized by acceptance of violent norms, bullying behaviors, and anger dysregulation (N = 13, 1.5%); a “jealous-conflictual” class characterized by cognitive and emotional jealousy, negative couple quality, and anger dysregulation (N = 85, 10%). Controlling for age, sex, and longitudinal stability, physical DA was predicted significantly by the “highly aggressive” profile (β = .11; p < .05), psychological DA by the “jealous-conflictual” profile (β = .16; p < .01), and sexual DA by the “jealous-conflictual” (β = .20; p < .001) and “highly aggressive” profile as a trend (β = .08; p = .071). Conclusions Specific risk profiles differentially predict risk for physical, sexual, and psychological DA perpetration. A general aggressive pattern predicts physical DA and sexual DA weakly, whereas psychological and sexual DA are associated with a couple of risks, where the dimension of jealousy, control, and conflict characterizes the dynamic between partners. Policy Implications Findings suggested that physical DA, and at a lower level sexual DA, should be prevented using cross-cutting strategies on general aggression. Psychological and sexual DA might require more contextually based interventions.

Dating Aggression and Observed Behaviors in a Nonconflictual Situation: The Role of Negative Anticipation

Past observational studies highlight meaningful behavioral differences between aggressive and nonaggressive couples during conflict interactions. However, research is needed on how aggressive couples communicate in other, nonconflictual interactional contexts. This study investigates how dating partners’ perpetration of physical aggression relates to observed behaviors during a laboratory-based discussion during which dating couples planned a date together. We also investigated whether negative anticipation of the upcoming discussion influences dating partners’ observed behaviors. Results showed that perpetration of dating aggression from one partner is linked to more negative behaviors from the other partner during the discussion. This association, however, is moderated by negative anticipation of the discussion; the link between aggression from one’s partner and negative behaviors is significant at high levels (+1 SD) but not at low levels (–1 SD)of negative anticipation. One’s own dating aggression also relates to fewer positive behaviors during the discussion. Findings suggest that couple aggression spills over to and potentially degrades the discussion of even nonthreatening, potentially enjoyable communications. Results also underscore negative anticipation of an interaction as a potential risky process that increases the likelihood of antagonistic exchanges between partners. The discussion addresses putative pathways between partner aggression and generalized communication patterns, and potential bi-directional effects with negative anticipation. We also discuss practical implications and targets of intervention to counteract the establishment of problematic communication dynamics in young couples.

Is This WhatsApp Conversation Aggressive? Adolescents’ Perception of Cyber Dating Aggression

This study investigated adolescents’ understanding of cyber dating aggression in terms of frequency and aggressiveness: how prevalent they perceived cyber dating aggression among adolescents and how aggressive they perceived such behaviors to be. To do so, different WhatsApp scenarios were presented to adolescents, controlling for the typology of cyber dating aggression (verbal/emotional, controlling, or sexual) and its publicity (public or private cyber dating aggression). The moderating effect of gender and moral disengagement (MD) was also analyzed. A total of 262 adolescents (56.5% girls; mean age of 14.46 years) participated in the study and answered a computer-based questionnaire. General linear models revealed that adolescents consider cyber dating aggression to be present in most adolescent romantic relationships. Controlling online behavior was perceived as the most frequent and the least aggressive behavior. Adolescents rated private cyber aggression as more frequent and less aggressive than public cyber aggressions. Controlling for gender, girls reported that cyber dating aggression was more common and more severe than boys. Moreover, participants with high levels of MD perceived cyber dating aggressions to be less aggressive than participants with medium-low MD. This study reveals the significance of the type of cyber dating aggression, the public/private dimension, gender, and MD as variables that influence adolescent understanding of cyber dating aggression. These results have implications not only for the design of cyber dating aggression prevention programs but also for future research on cyber dating aggression.

When Are Sexist Attitudes Risk Factors for Dating Aggression? The Role of Moral Disengagement in Spanish Adolescents

This research aimed to explore the interplay of sexism and moral disengagement (MD) in the explanation of psychological and physical dating aggression. The sample comprised 1113 Spanish adolescents (49.2% girls, n = 552) between the ages of 12 to 17 (M = 14.44). A latent profile analysis conducted with sub-sample of 432 adolescents with sentimental experience identified four configurations: (1) benevolent; (2) less disengaged and sexist; (3) highly disengaged and sexist; and (4) moderately disengaged and sexist. Regarding gender and age, boys were more present than girls in the moderately disengaged and sexist group, as well as in the highly disengaged and sexist profile. The highly disengaged and sexist and benevolent groups were the youngest. Regarding dating aggression, the highly disengaged and sexist group had the highest engagement in physical and psychological aggression. However, the others three profiles showed a similar engagement in aggression. These findings confirmed the moderating role of MD on the relationship between sexism and dating aggression and suggested that the association between MD, sexism, and dating aggression was exponential; that is, the risk appeared when adolescents were extremely hostile and disengaged. The results have implications for the design of tailored dating aggression prevention programmes.

Prevalence, gender and age differences of dating aggression among Italian adolescents

The present study represents an effort to expand and deepen the scant literature on Adolescent Dating Aggression (ADA) within the Italian context; adolescent dating aggression is a public health issue of interest due to its increasing frequency among adolescents. The prevalence of verbal-emotional and physical ADA was examined as well as gender and age differences in a sample of Italian adolescents. Participants included 436 adolescents (47.7% males; 52.3% females) living in northern Italy, aged 16 to 18 years (M = 17.11). Participants completed the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory measuring abusive behaviors between adolescent dating partners. Non-parametric analyses were computed. Verbal-emotional ADA perpetration and victimization were much more common than physical ADA perpetration and victimization. Females reported higher levels of verbal-emotional and physical ADA perpetration than males. To fully investigate gender differences single behaviors were analyzed and described. Finally, age differences emerged only for perpetrated verbal-emotional abuse with such aggression being highest at age 18. This research suggests that in order to prevent the onset of dating aggression in teens in northern Italy, prevention programs may need to begin earlier than previously provided in junior high school. Another core conclusion is that physical aggression against partners is a problem for both males and females, thus intervention for the empowerment of interpersonal skills are needed.