Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Search Tips
Register for SRCD21
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
INTRO: Dating violence is a significant problem among adolescents. The 2013 National Risk Youth behavior survey revealed that among students that dated, 20.9% of female students and 10.4% of male students experienced dating violence in the past 12 months (Vagi et al., 2015). Actual numbers are likely higher as partners often under-report dating violence (Davis et al., 2003). Previous research demonstrates that attitudes towards dating violence (ATDV) are a risk factor of violence in romantic relationships (Slep et al., 2001; Lewis et al., 2002; Josephson & Prouix, 2008; McDonell et al., 2010). These effects become more pronounced when accounting for gender. Males are more likely to perpetrate dating violence when they believe male-female dating violence is acceptable, and females are more likely to perpetrate dating violence when they believe female-male dating violence is justifiable (O’Keefe, 1997). Despite the robust link between ATDV and violence in relationships, the current literature fails to examine how ATDV change over time in specific relationships. Such gaps are especially noteworthy, as attitudes may account for the escalation of violence within specific relationships and inform intervention efforts. In response to these gaps in the present literature, this study examines how ATDV predict increases in psychological, physical, and sexual dating violence within specific adolescent romantic relationships.
METHODS: Six waves of community-based data were collected from 120 participants (60 females) ages 18-25, within a romantic relationship. Electronic data collection occurred once a month, for six months. Participants were screened for prior dating aggression involvement in their current relationship or a past relationship, to recruit a high-risk sample. Data for this study were extracted from the baseline timepoint, and 6 months after baseline. The measures used to assess relevant variables were: Attitudes toward violence (Attitudes Toward Dating Violence Questionnaire) and dating aggression (Revised Conflict Tactic Scale).
RESULTS: Hypotheses were assessed using a series of linear regression models. To capture change, we examined associations between ATDV and subsequent psychological, physical, and sexual dating violence involvement, controlling for prior dating violence involvement. ATDV predicted increases in both physical and psychological dating violence involvement, within specific relationships (all ps< .01). However, attitudes were not associated with changes in sexual dating violence involvement. No gender interactions were found.
DISCUSSION: The predictive nature of ATDV for actual violence in a relationship may be due to the social learning theory (O’Keefe, 1997). If one believes violence is an appropriate response to conflict, one is more likely to behave violently. Although theorized that such beliefs may impact changes within a specific relationship, no work to date had tested this theoretical expectation. The current findings demonstrate this pattern, adding to the growing literature regarding the importance of ATDV. As awareness of dating violence among teens continues to rise, it becomes vital for researchers to uncover why adolescents believe dating violence is acceptable in relationships and how teens use such beliefs as a justification for their behavior. Future research should aim to examine these mechanisms in understanding the escalation of dating violence within relationships.